Toward A Positive Psychology of Relationships PDF

Toward a Positive
Psychology of
Relationships
This page intentionally left blank
Toward a Positive
Psychology of
Relationships
NEW DIRECTIONS IN THEORY
AND RESEARCH
Meg A. Warren and Stewart I. Donaldson, Editors

Copyright © 2018 by Meg A. Warren and Stewart I. Donaldson
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherw ise, except for the inclusion of brief quotations in a
review, without prior permission in writing from the publisher.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Warren, Meg A., editor. | Donaldson, Stewart I. (Stewart Ian), editor.
Title: Toward a positive psychology of relationships : new directions in theory and
research / Meg A. Warren and Stewart I. Donaldson, editors.
Description: Santa Barbara, California : Praeger, [2018] | Includes index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2017035626 (print) | LCCN 2017044688 (ebook) | ISBN 9781440838316
(e-book) | ISBN 9781440838309 (hard copy : alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Positive psychology. | Interpersonal relations.
Classification: LCC BF204.6 (ebook) | LCC BF204.6 .T69 2018 (print) | DDC 158.2—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017035626
ISBN: 978-1-4408-3830-9 (print)
978-1-4408-3831-6 (ebook)
22 21 20 19 18 1 2 3 4 5
This book is also available as an eBook.
Praeger
An Imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC
ABC-CLIO, LLC
130 Cremona Drive, P.O. Box 1911
Santa Barbara, California 93116-1911
www.abc-clio.com
This book is printed on acid-free paper
Manufactured in the United States of America

To those who sacrifice and go out of their way to develop and
nurture positive relationships in all aspects of life.
Contents
Preface xi
Chapter 1
Other People M
atter: The Power of Positive Relationships 1
Stewart I. Donaldson and Scott I. Donaldson
Chapter 2
Applying Positive Psychology to Advance
Relationship Science 9
Meg A. Warren, Scott I. Donaldson, and Joo Young Lee
Chapter 3
Positive Psychology, Relational Self-Esteem, and Increasing
Well-Being 35
Christopher J. Mruk
Chapter 4
The Positive Psychology of Romantic Love 55
Bianca P. Acevedo
Chapter 5
Toward a Positive Psychology of Online Romantic
Relationships: A New Frontier? 77
Richard A. Dowlat and Stewart I. Donaldson
vii
viii Contents
Chapter 6
Positive Relationships at Work in Early Childhood
Education 93
Anne Douglass
Chapter 7
Developmental Tools That Build Social and Emotional
Competence in School: A Focus on Effortful Control and
Ego-Resiliency 119
Zoe E. Taylor and Tracy L. Spinrad
Chapter 8
Building Positive Relationships with Adolescents in
Educational Contexts: Principles and Practices for Educators
in School and Community-Based Settings 145
Gretchen Brion-Meisels, Jessica Fei, and Deepa Vasudevan
Chapter 9
Social Flow: Optimal Experience with Others at Work
and Play 179
Hannah E. Lucas
Chapter 10
Measuring the Impact of Quality of Relationships through the
Positive Emotional Attractor 193
Richard E. Boyatzis
Chapter 11
Facilitating Meaningful Communication among
Older Adults 211
Vera Roos
Chapter 12
Positive Psychology, Close Relationship Processes, and
Cultural Diversity 231
Stanley O. Gaines, Jr., and Nelli Ferenczi
Contents ix
Chapter 13
“Being H uman Together”: Positive Relationships in the
Context of Diversity, Culture, and Collective Well-Being 247
Shelly P. Harrell
About the Editors and Contributors 285
Index 291
Preface
The task is to learn how to enjoy everyday life without diminishing

other p
eople’s chances to enjoy theirs.
—Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
The cofounder of the science of positive psychology, Mihaly Csikszentmih-
alyi has inspired millions of people on this planet to live meaningful and
engaged lives that enhance the well-being of other p eople and promote pos-
itive relationships. Over the past two decades, hundreds of empirical stud-
ies across a wide range of topics associated with positive psychology have
been conducted using rigorous scientific methods. In 2015, a systematic
review of this extensive peer-reviewed literature, titled “Happiness, Excel-
lence, and Optimal Functioning Revisited: Examining the Peer-Reviewed
Literature Linked to Positive Psychology,” was published in the Journal of
Positive Psychology. As one looks across this vast empirical literature, it is
clear that our relationships with other people across all the domains of our
lives often emerge as the most important predictors of our health, well-
being, work performance, and societal contributions. This well-established
finding inspired the authors of this volume to turn the spotlight on the
nature of positive relationships. That is, how might positive psychology and
the application of the positive lens to the topic of relationships further our
understanding of human flourishing?
It is our hope that the perspectives, questions asked, and research pre-
sented in the chapters in this volume will help guide positive psychology
practitioners, thought leaders, researchers, and students in their pursuits
to promote optimal h uman functioning across the globe.
Much of the financial support for this project was provided by the Cla-
remont Evaluation Center at Claremont Graduate University. We are deeply
grateful for the administrative support provided by Kathryn Doiron, Scott
Donaldson, and Brandon Sorenson, members of the Positive Organizational
xi
xii Preface
Psychology Research Lab. We are especially indebted to the authors of the

chapters in this volume for providing engaging contributions in a timely
manner. Special thanks to Debbie Carvalko and the entire editorial team
at Praeger for all their outstanding support and contributions throughout
this project.
1
Other P eople Matter: The Power
of Positive Relationships
Stewart I. Donaldson and Scott I. Donaldson
“Other people matter.” I say that in every positive psychology lecture

I give and e very positive psychology workshop I conduct. It sounds like
a bumper sticker slogan, but it is actually a good summary of what
positive psychology research has shown about the good life broadly
construed. It is in the company of others that we often experience
pleasure and certainly how we best savor its aftermath. It is through
character strengths that connect us to o thers—like gratitude—that
many of us find satisfaction and meaning in life. It is with other p eople
that we work, love, and play. Good relationships with other p eople may
be a necessary condition for our own happiness, even in markedly
individualist cultures like the contemporary United States.
—Christopher Peterson
INTRODUCTION
The International Positive Psychology Association defines positive psychol
ogy as the scientific study of what enables individuals and communities to
thrive (IPPA, 2017). Over the past two decades, hundreds of empirical
1
2 Toward a Positive Psychology of Relationships
studies using rigorous scientific methods commonly found across the

discipline of psychology have been conducted to address cutting edge
research questions about human thriving. In 2015, a systematic review of
1,336 peer-reviewed positive psychology articles, titled “Happiness, Excel-
lence, and Optimal Functioning Revisited: Examining the Peer-Reviewed
Literature Linked to Positive Psychology,” was published in the Journal of
Positive Psychology (Donaldson, Dollwet, & Rao, 2015). More than 750 of
these peer-reviewed articles included empirical tests of positive psychol
ogy theories, principles, and interventions. This work examining the scien-
tific basis of positive psychology was recently expanded in a book titled
Scientific Advances in Positive Psychology (Warren & Donaldson, 2017).
One of the most striking metafindings from all this scientific work focused
on understanding happiness, excellence, and optimal human functioning
is that “other people matter.”
Edward Diener, another pioneer and contemporary thought leader in
the area of positive psychology, has conducted and analyzed numerous
empirical studies of happiness and subjective well-being. He concluded
that despite the common myth that income and wealth are the strongest
predictors of happiness (they are not highly correlated in most studies), it
is actually the quality of our social relationships that emerges in study
a fter study as the strongest predictor of our happiness and well-being
(Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2011). This robust finding extends to the quality
of our relationships with our significant o thers, family, friends, acquain-
tances, coworkers, and supervisors or leaders at work. For example, War-
ren, Donaldson, and Luthans (2017) summarized the theory and research
supporting that positive work relationships are significant predictors of
employee well-being and optimal functioning at work. This literature shows
that high-quality relationships at work are clearly linked to outcomes that
foster employee and work team flourishing (Dutton & Ragins, 2006). Reis
and Gable (2003) argued that the positive and negative aspects of relation-
ships may be best understood as functionally independent, and encour-
aged researchers to develop a “positive psychology of relationships.” The
authors in this volume have responded to that call. In the chapters that
follow you w ill learn about some of the latest thinking and research illus-
trating the power of positive relationships in most aspects of our lives.
A brief overview of each chapter is provided below to get you ready to dive
deeply into some of the latest theories, research, and applications, mov-
ing us toward an evidence-based understanding of the power of positive
relationships.
Other People Matter 3
APPLYING POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY TO

ADVANCE RELATIONSHIP SCIENCE
Warren, Donaldson, and Lee (Chapter 2) systematically reviewed the
most popular areas of research on positive relationships and the extent to
which they attend to the relational context.
Positive interpersonal relationships were found to be intrinsic compo-
nents of both psychological well-being and life satisfaction across the
human lifespan (Diener & Seligman, 2009; Reis, Collins, & Berscheid, 2000;
Reis & Gable, 2003). Chapter 2 suggests positive relationships are the primary
context to initiate, develop, and demonstrate the three pillars of positive
psychology (i.e., positive states, positive traits, and positive institutions).
How t hese constructs contribute to the enrichment of relationship science
was examined, as well as some of the emerging contributions to the positive
psychology of relationships.
POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, RELATIONAL SELF-ESTEEM,

AND INCREASING WELL-BEING
Mruk (Chapter 3) examined the intersection of positive psychology and
self-esteem, reviewing self-protective and self-enhancing f actors as mech-
anisms of self-esteem in relationships. He then addressed the similarities
of the research on self-esteem and positive emotions followed by the appli-
cation of a training program called Competence and Worthiness Training
(CWT), which is focused on using self-esteem to increase relational well-
being. Mruk concludes with f uture directions, asserting that self-esteem is
crucial for fostering healthy, positive interpersonal relationships.
THE POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY OF ROMANTIC LOVE

Acevedo (Chapter 4) examined and discussed the research on the posi-
tive psychology of romantic love. She provided a background of what is
known about romantic love, emphasizing work on the neural underpinnings
of love, such as the mechanisms of romantic love, motherly love, and com-
passion among others. However, in her view this paints an incomplete pic-
ture of love, wherein she believes a positive mindset can develop love even
further and maintain it in close romantic relationships. She also described
the history and scholarly thinking on the topic of love, modern studies, and
theoretical perspectives, including new findings on genetics and pair-
bonding relationships. Acevedo concluded by suggesting a robust area of
f uture research focused on investigating an effortful approach to romantic
love composed of such topics as shared relationship engagement and cog-
nitive control of positive thoughts toward relationship partners.
OWARD A POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY OF ONLINE

T
ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS: A NEW FRONTIER?
How can positive psychology promote romantic relationships online?
Dowlat and Donaldson begin to answer this question in Chapter 5. They
observe that traditional face-to-face relationships have been central to
research on romantic relationships, but an understudied area is the explo-
ration of antecedents and consequences of online dating and relationships.
Applications of positive psychology theory and research to this new phe-
nomenon in modern societies, romantic online relationships, may hold
great promise for improving romantic relationships.
POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS AT WORK IN

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
Douglass (Chapter 6) uses a positive organ izational scholarship (POS)
lens to review early childhood education. As a field that is heavily focused
on child outcomes in the child-teacher relationship, an emphasis on adult
relationships (i.e., teachers, administrators, between teachers and parents,
etc.) has long been overlooked. In this chapter, the focus is on adults in early
childhood education settings, and how the quality of their relationships
impacts both child and adult outcomes. Douglass initially described parent-
teacher partnerships and systems change, followed by current research that
is being done through the positive relationships and positive change lens.
She concluded by suggesting f uture directions and applications in the early
childhood education setting, particularly aimed at using positive principles
to promote quality improvement in the educational workplace.
DEVELOPMENTAL TOOLS THAT BUILD SOCIAL AND

EMOTIONAL COMPETENCE IN SCHOOL: A FOCUS ON
EFFORTFUL CONTROL AND EGO-RESILIENCY
How well c hildren do in schools is not just a function of cognitive and
academic abilities, but also social and emotional competence. In Chapter 7,
Taylor and Spinrad examined two facets of socioemotional functions,
effortful control and ego resiliency, both positive adaptive characteristics
important for academic achievement in early childhood and adolescence.
The authors described how important positive socioemotional factors are
for school success in the immediate and long term, for children in the edu-
cational setting.
BUILDING POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH ADOLESCENTS

IN EDUCATIONAL CONTEXTS: PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES
FOR EDUCATORS IN SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY-BASED
SETTINGS
Brion-Meisels, Fei, and Vasudevan (Chapter 8) examined how to develop
positive relationships in adults and adolescents in educational settings.
Building on Sameroff and Chandler’s (1975) transactional model of devel-
opment, the authors reviewed both interpersonal practices that build posi-
tive relationships with adolescents and structural practices that build
contexts in which these relationships occur. This chapter is important for
researchers and pract it ioners seeking to develop such positive contexts.
Although building positive relationships with adolescents is no easy task,
Brion-Meisels and colleagues believe that by collaborating with each other
(i.e., other adult practitioners) and youth it is possible to build powerful pos-
itive relationships.
SOCIAL FLOW: OPTIMAL EXPERIENCE WITH

OTHERS AT WORK AND PLAY
A wealth of research has been conducted on the phenomenon of flow,
including how flow leads to performance in groups, and how social contexts
enhance mood and subjective well-being. However, few studies have exam-
ined flow in social settings. Lucas (Chapter 9) discussed a relatively new
theory called “social flow.” Although this is a nascent area of research, Lucas
highlights the potential of social flow to be more enjoyable than solitary
flow, especially when high-quality connections (HQCs) are present. She
concluded her chapter by calling for f uture research to identify the ante-
cedents, processes, and outcomes of the social flow experience.
MEASURING THE IMPACT OF QUALITY OF RELATIONSHIPS

THROUGH THE POSITIVE EMOTIONAL ATTRACTOR
Using his intentional change theory for identifying high-quality con-
nections (HQCs), Boyatzis (Chapter 10) developed a research program
around shared vision, compassion, and positive mood in relationships. He
examined decades of research findings and came to the conclusion that
relationships are indeed a crucial component of shaping behavioral and
performance outcomes, such as positive mood, engagement, and leader-
ship effectiveness. In this chapter, he discussed the new construct of posi-
tive and negative emotional attractor, and developed and validated a scale
to measure it. Boyatzis posited that future research should continue to

explore these avenues of quality relationships aimed at finding more medi-
ators and moderators of t hese positive relationships.
FACILITATING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION

AMONG OLDER ADULTS
With an aging population and limited resources it is more important
than ever to understand what constitutes a positive relationship (e.g.,
meaningful and warm relationship) for older adults. In Chapter 11, Roos
attempted to understand what happens interpersonally between older
adults using an interactional perspective. Using person-centered inter-
views, she observes the importance of the relationship between effective
interpersonal styles and relational well-being, given that older adult rela-
tionships are dynamic and contextually based. In her view, positive rela-
tionships have the ability to empower and enable older adults to lead a
healthy lifestyle.
POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, CLOSE RELATIONSHIP PROCESSES,

AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY
Rao and Donaldson (2015) exposed the lack of research on diversity and
inclusion in positive psychology and issued a call for researchers to engage
this important topic. Gaines and Ferenczi (Chapter 12) answered this call
by examining the intersection among positive psychology, close relation-
ships, and diversity. They suggested the value of relying on key assumptions
within interdependence theory and the self-expansion model as a founda-
tion to build a path forward in this area of research.
“BEING H UMAN TOGETHER”: POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS IN

THE CONTEXT OF DIVERSITY, CULTURE, AND COLLECTIVE
WELL-BEING
The final chapter by Harrell (Chapter 13) expanded conceptual and
applied boundaries in positive psychology by looking at positive relation-
ships in the context of cultural diversity, socioecological context, and
sociopolitical dynamics of power. Her first call to action was to extend the
dyadic level of relationships to include communities, countries, and nations.
She then suggested a balanced positive relationship science that can aid us
in addressing diversity and equity issues, as a way to focus our concerns on
collective well-being. In summary, being human together argues that posi-

tive relationships can connect humans across all levels of race, ethnicity,
and religion, among other social categories of difference.
CONCLUSION
The authors of the chapters in this volume w ere asked to expand our
understanding of the power of positive relationships and why “other p eople
matter.” By drawing on theory, research, and applications of both positive
psychology and relationship science, we think they have delivered. We hope
that you discover new knowledge and much insight about the positive psy
chology of relationships as you travel through and develop a positive rela-
tionship with the following pages.
REFERENCES
Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2011). Happiness: Unlocking the mysteries of psy-
chological wealth. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Diener, E., & Seligman, M. P. (2009). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-
being. In E. Diener (Ed.), The science of well-being: The collected works of Ed
Diener (pp. 201–265). New York: Springer Science + Business Media.
Donaldson, S. I., Dollwet, M., & Rao, M. A. (2015). Happiness, excellence, and opti-
mal human functioning revisited: Examining the peer-reviewed literature
linked to positive psychology. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(3),
185–195.
Dutton, J. E., & Ragins, B. R. (Eds.). (2006). Exploring positive relationships at work:
Building a theoretical and research foundation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
International Positive Psychology Association (IPPA). (2017). Definition of posi-
tive psychology. Retrieved June 30, 2017, from https://w ww.ippanetwork
.org
Rao, M. A., & Donaldson, S. I. (2015). Expanding opportunities for diversity in pos-
itive psychology: An examination of gender, race and ethnicity. Canadian
Psychology, 56, 271–282.
Reis, H. T., Collins, W. A., & Berscheid, E. (2000). The relationship context of
human behavior and development. Psychological Bulletin, 126(6), 844.
Reis, H. T., & Gable, S. L. (2003). Toward a positive psychology of relationships.
In C. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life
well-lived (pp. 129–159). Washington, DC: American Psychological Asso-
ciation. doi:10.1037/10594-006
Sameroff, A. J., & Chandler, M. J. (1975). Reproductive risk and the continuum of
caretaker casualty. In F. D. Horow itz (Ed.), Review of child development
research (Vol. 4). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Warren, M. A., & Donaldson, S. I. (Eds.). (2017). Scientific advances in positive psy
chology. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Warren, M. A., Donaldson, S. I., & Luthans, F. (2017). Taking positive psychology
to the workplace: Positive organizational psychology, positive organizational
behavior, and positive organizational scholarship. In M. A. Warren & S. I.
Donaldson (Eds.), Scientific advances in positive psychology. Santa Barbara,
CA: ABC-CLIO.
2
Applying Positive Psychology to
Advance Relationship Science
Meg A. Warren, Scott I. Donaldson, and Joo Young Lee
If civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of h uman

relationships—the ability of all p
eoples, of all kinds, to live together, in
the same world at peace.
—Franklin D. Roosevelt
INTRODUCTION
Be it popular culture, age-old wisdom, or rigorous science—most con-
cede that positive relationships are fundamental to what makes life worth-
while. Positive psychology, the scientific pursuit of what makes life worth
living, would therefore be a natural home for the systematic study of posi-
tive relationships. So how has the field of positive psychology contributed
to the science of positive relationships? What is the role of relationships in
positive psychology? This chapter sets out to explore t hese questions.
Before we discuss the role of relationships, it is useful to revisit the aims
and goals of positive psychology. Positive psychology has been described
as the study of the conditions that promote optimal flourishing of p eople,
9
groups, and institutions (Gable & Haidt, 2005). As such, positive psychology
is concerned with evaluating h uman experience in terms of h uman assets,
rather than liabilities or h uman shortcomings. At the inception of the pos-
itive psychology movement, founding fathers Martin Seligman and Mihaly
Csikszentmihalyi aspired to reframe the investigation of human experi-
ence away from the model of pathology traditionally found in the psycho-
logical sciences, and toward the features of human experience (e.g., hope,
creativity, and wisdom) that make life worth living (Seligman & Csikszent-
mihalyi, 2000). They envisioned positive psychology as a science of well-being
and thriving that stood on three pillars: positive states, positive traits, and
positive institutions. Positive states w ere comprised of positive emotions
and experiences (e.g., happiness, love). The study of positive traits included
empirical examination of character strengths and virtues, such as wisdom,
courage, and compassion. The third pillar, positive institutions, was con-
cerned with developing of families, schools, organizations, and communi-
ties that fostered positive states, enabled the cultivation of positive traits,
and exemplified positive qualities.
Leading scholar and a founding father of positive psychology, Chris
Peterson (2006) encapsulated the essence of positive psychology in three
words: other people matter (p. 249). So what is the role of relationships in
positive psychology? Over the years, various conceptualizations of the link
between positive psychology and relationships have been advanced. The
most popular stance within the positive psychology movement is that pos-
itive relationships are fundamental components of well-being (e.g., PERMA
model; Seligman, 2011) and psychological well-being (Ryff & Keyes, 1995).
Further, a wealth of empirical research has found social relationships to
consistently be the most robust predictor of well-being, when examined
across a range of cultures and contexts (Diener & Seligman, 2009). As such,
positive relationships have a firm place in the science of well-being—whether
as a component or predictor, depending on how well-being is conceptual-
ized. In terms of its location in the field of positive psychology, according
to Mruk (Chapter 3), relationships are fundamental to the institution of
marriage, family, and community, and therefore are situated within the
third pillar of positive psychology—positive (societal) institutions. Whereas
Fincham and Beach (2010) proffered positive relationship science, a mar-
riage of positive psychology and relationship science, to be a fourth new pil-
lar of positive psychology. Others have noted that most psychological
processes (Reis & Gable, 2003), and indeed positive psychological processes
in general (Maniaci & Reis, 2010), are embedded in relational contexts. As
such relationships may be the foundation underlying all the pillars of posi-
tive psychology. Despite t hese connections, however, positive relationships
are relatively understudied in positive psychology. Specifically, positive
Applying Positive Psychology to Advance Relationship Science 11
psychological research has offered relatively few insights on what are the
defining features of positive relationships, what individual, relational, and
contextual f actors predict positive relationships, how positive relationships
can be developed and maintained, and how positive psychological processes
play out in relational contexts.
In this chapter, we argue and highlight that relationships are the fun-
damental context in which many positive psychological processes are
developed and nurtured, and are therefore deserving of more systematic
inquiry. We review the existing literat ure on the most popular areas of
research in positive psychology and examine the extent to which they
attend to the relational context. Further, we examine how these con-
structs contribute to the enrichment of relationship science. Finally, we
review some of the few emerging contributions on the positive psychology
of relationships.
EVOLUTIONARY BASIS FOR THE CENTRALITY

OF RELATIONSHIPS
What is the role of relationships in optimal human functioning? The
adaptive role of relationships can be traced back to its vital function in the
survival of the species, such that according to Berscheid (2003), relation-
ships constitute the single most important factor responsible for the sur-
vival of Homo sapiens (p. 39). Brewer and Caporael (1990) suggest that small,
cooperative group living was the preferred survival strategy of humans in
response to the natural physical environment (i.e., predators, food). There-
fore, sociality may serve as a built-in biological mechanism to promote
survival and facilitate social-cognitive processes that spur interpersonal
relationships (Cosmides & Tooby, 1992). Hence, functions of social rela-
tionships (i.e., mating, reciprocal alliances, coalitions, and hierarchies) are
central to the design of the human mind, which drive humans toward pos-
itive, enduring, and significant interpersonal relationships (Baumeister &
Leary, 1995; Buss & Kenrick, 1998).
The most ancient core configuration of h uman interaction occurred
in dyadic relationships (Caporael, 1997). Moreover, dyadic, work-family
groups, and demes all served as focal social groups, providing the template
for social patterning (i.e., biological clocks, rhythmicity), mirroring, and
mimicry in the process of creating social structures (Caporael, 1997). Other
characteristics of dyadic h uman interpersonal behaviors can be seen in
mother-infant attachment, sympathy, and reciprocity. Building on the the-
oretical position of the evolutionary perspective, we highlight that interper-
sonal relationships, particularly, dyadic, are the locus of human interaction
and the context in which humans develop their physical and psychological
capacities.
RELATIONSHIPS AND WELL-BEING

Research shows that relationships are adaptive not only for basic survival
but also for human health and well-being. A wealth of research demon-
strates that relationships are the most important predictor of well-being,
such that p eople in positive relationships tend to live longer, be more coop-
erative, and have stronger immune systems (Barak, 2006; Diener & Biswas-
Diener, 2008; Diener, Oishi, & Lucas, 2016; Pressman & Cohen, 2005;
Whelan & Zelenski, 2012). For example, married p eople are happier than
divorced or single people, and are more prosocial and interested in social
activities (Whelan & Zelenski, 2012). Individuals with higher subjective
well-being (SWB) have stronger immune and cardiovascular systems, and
positive mood versus negative or neutral mood predicts improved physio-
logical parameters such as cortisol, blood pressure, and immunity to dis-
ease (Barak, 2006; Pressman & Cohen, 2005).
Furthermore, relationships and happiness share a bidirectional link so
that happiness also predicts positive relational processes. For instance, hap-
pier people tend to be more cooperative, pro-peace, and trusting of the gov-
ernment (Graham & Pettinato, 2002; Kahneman & Krueger, 2006; Tov &
Diener, 2009). Happier p eople also maintain closer social networks and
have low marital distress compared to t hose who are not happy, and hap-
pier people appear to be more successful in their relationships than their
less happy peers (Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005). In addition, vari-
ables such as relational quality, relational intimacy, and relational satisfac-
tion are connected with happiness (Argyle, 2001; Ballas & Dorling, 2007;
Demir, 2008). For example, friendship accounts for 58 percent of the vari-
ance in happiness, with relational quality as the most important predictor
of friendship over number of friends (Demir & Weitekamp, 2007). Thus,
not only the presence of interpersonal relationships, but their quality is
fundamental to constructing a life worth living.
The link between well-being and relationships is so deeply intertwined
that positive psychologists such as Keyes (1998) and later Seligman (2011)
suggested that positive relationships should be thought of not just as a pre-
dictor of well-being but an intrinsic criterion. Seligman posited that in addi-
tion to the three core elements of authentic happiness theory (i.e., positive
emotions, engagement, and meaning) positive relationships (i.e., not just
how you feel about your relationships, but how your relational partners feel
about you) should be included. This reiterates the centrality of positive rela-
tionships in well-being and furthers the notion that relationships are the
site where we witness optimal aspects of human flourishing.
RELATIONSHIPS AND MEANING IN LIFE

A key aspect of well-being is the sense that life is meaningful. Two fun-
damental theories of happiness and well-being, that is, orientations to
happiness (Peterson, Park, & Seligman, 2005) and the PERMA model of
well-being (Seligman, 2011) posit that meaning is a core element of well-
being. When one perceives one’s life as meaningful, one is likely to enjoy
higher life satisfaction (Steger, Oishi, & Kesebir, 2011; Triplett, Tedeschi,
Cann, Calhoun, & Reeve, 2012). Martela and Steger (2016) offer three ways
through which one may have meaning in life: coherence, significance, and
purpose. When one understands one’s life better (i.e., has sense of coher-
ence), feels worthy (i.e., sense that life has significance), and has purpose in
life (i.e., has core goals, aims, and direction), one may achieve more mean-
ing in life.
Coherence, worthiness, and purpose are often constructed in our inter-
actions with other p eople. For example, one tends to evolve in the direction
of one’s ideal self as a product of an intimate partner’s affirmation, arguably
deriving coherence, worthiness, and purpose as a result (Drigotas, Rusbult,
Wieselquist, & Whitton, 1999). In old age, although melancholy may arise
from physical and cognitive decline, those older adults who anticipate sup-
port from others are more likely to have a sense of worthiness (Krause,
2007). Further, the quality of relationships, that is, positive interactions and
emotional support from family and close friends, is important to their sense
of meaning in life. Meaning derived from positive relationships have also
been found to have health implications. In a study on patients suffering
from advanced cancer across Spain, Germany, and Switzerland, interper-
sonal relationships, at both the family and wider social level, were found
to give the greatest meaning in life (Tomás-Sábado et al., 2015). Thus, posi-
tive interpersonal relationships are critical to a happy, meaningful, and
healthy life.
RELATIONSHIPS AND THE THREE PILLARS

OF POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY
Relationships and Positive Subjective States
Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) identified positive subjective
experiences as one of the three key pillars of positive psychology. They noted
that positive subjective experiences such as optimism, love, and positive
emotions are fundamental to what makes life worth living. In this section,
we review the research on the most studied positive subjective experiences
in positive psychology and highlight interpersonal relationships that offer
the contexts in which many of these are experienced. Further, we examine
the contributions of t hese positive experiences to improving interpersonal

relationships.
Positive emotions. According to Fredrickson (2001), positive emotions
help build durable assets (i.e., physical, psychological, and social) and pro-
mote positive interpersonal relationships, unlike negative emotions, which
drain assets and valuable resources. Positive emotions predict greater
involvement in social activities, more enjoyable social interactions, and
greater friendship closeness (Berry & Hansen, 1996; Berry, Willingham, &
Thayer, 2000; Burger & Caldwell, 2000). Thus, positive emotions can foster
and strengthen relational processes.
Just as positive emotions can create attentiveness to opportunities in the
environment they can also create attentiveness to opportunities in other
people. For instance, Cohn and Frederickson (2006) proposed that broad-
ening is essential to the development of relationship bonds. Instead of focus-
ing on our immediate needs, broadening enables us to focus on relationship
investment, which can fulfill our needs in distant and far-sighted ways.
Similarly, individuals experiencing positive emotional states form more
inclusive social groups (Dovidio, Gaertner, Isen, Rust, & Guerra, 1998). In
one study with first-year college students, positive emotions predicted self-
other overlap with a new college roommate after the first week of the semes-
ter, which then predicted a more complex understanding of the roommate
at a follow-up a month l ater (Waugh & Fredrickson, 2006). Further, sharing
and reinforcing of positive emotions by partners (i.e., positive capitalization)
is found to be predictive of relational satisfaction (Gable & Gosnell, 2011).
Thus, positive emotions can help enhance positive relational processes and
outcomes.
In addition, relationships also frequently serve as the context in which
positive emotions are experienced. For instance, in one study, ratings of
subjective feelings significantly improved when participants viewed emo-
tional pictures together rather than alone. This affect was accompanied by
increased brain activity in the ventral striatum and medial orbitofrontal
cortex, two areas known for reward circuitry (Wagner et al., 2015). Further,
relationships are often the sites in which key life events such as marriage
and having children are experienced that produce happiness, joy, and grat-
itude, among other positive emotions (Fitness & Williams, 2013). Thus, rela-
tionships are an important context for the study of positive emotions.
Gratitude. Gratitude is often conceptualized as an “other-oriented”
moral emotion (Tangney, Stuewig, & Mashek, 2007) or “other-praising”
emotion (Algoe & Haidt, 2009). The experience of gratitude often occurs
when individuals are the beneficiaries of others’ benevolence (Tangney,
Stuewig, & Mashek, 2007). However, the research on gratitude has emerged
mostly from a personality (i.e., dispositional gratitude; Tsang, Carpenter,
Roberts, Frisch, & Carlisle, 2014), and emotions lens (i.e., state gratitude;
Bartlett & DeSteno, 2006; Kruse, Chancellor, Ruberton, & Lyubomirsky,

2014). As such, gratitude is often studied in the context of individual out-
comes such as the effect on one’s happiness and psychological well-being
(Wood, Froh, & Geraghty, 2010).
However, as gratitude usually takes place in a social context, there is
much scope for relationship research on gratitude. For example, in a widely
cited study (Emmons & McCullough, 2003), participants wrote a weekly
benefit list (study 1) and completed self-guided daily gratitude exercises
(study 2). The results showed that listing of another’s kind behavior increased
gratitude, and gratitude in turn, generated more prosocial behavior such as
helping another with a personal problem or offering emotional support.
Therefore, while the participant was the beneficiary of others’ beneficent
behavior in the first study, o
thers benefited from the subjects’ gratitude l ater
on. Similarly, the research on reciprocity shows that gratitude predicts rela-
tional outcomes. In one study, perceptions of benefactor responsiveness
predicted gratitude for benefits, and gratitude in the short term (one week
in this study) predicted relationship outcomes one month later (Algoe,
Haidt, & Gable, 2008). Thus, it is likely that such gratitude exchanges would
spur positive interpersonal interactions, creating virtuous interpersonal
cycles of receiving (i.e., receiving help causes gratitude) and giving (giving
help to o thers b ecause of one’s grateful feeling) within relationships in
which gratitude first occurred, as well as the creation and strengthening of
new relationships. This has been supported in recent studies that have
examined the “pay it forward” effect of gratitude in social networks (Chang,
Lin, & Chen, 2012). Further, research on mentoring dyads suggests that
gratitude is associated with relationship development and maintenance
(Algoe, Haidt, & Gable, 2008). Thus, gratitude has the capacity to strengthen
relational processes and relational outcomes.
However, barring a few recent research forays, research that examines
the relational context and relational impact of gratitude is relatively scarce.
Seminal research contributions of gratitude in the context of interpersonal
relationships demonstrate that the interpersonal context of gratitude
deserves more attention. In doing so, positive scholars would benefit from
seeing the wider picture of the way gratitude plays out in real life.
Relationships and Positive Traits

Compassion. Compassion is an interpersonal process that involves
noticing, feeling, sense-making, and acting in a way that alleviates the suf-
fering of another (Dutton, Workman, & Hardin, 2014). A few studies indi-
cate that compassion is related to positive relational outcomes across various
types of relationships. For instance, compassion is positively associated with
prosocial relationship behaviors, relationship quality, and relationship sta-

bility in romantic relationships (Fehr, Harasymchuk, & Sprecher, 2014).
Similarly, Kirby (2016) suggests that compassionate parenting practices may
be critical to enhancing nurturing family environments. Compassionate
goals are also related to increased closeness, connection, social support, and
trust among friends (Crocker & Canevello, 2008). Furthermore, compassion
is associated with prosociality to strangers such as charitable giving and
helping strangers (Lim & DeSteno, 2016), and therefore has the capacity to
not only strengthen and nurture existing relationships but also to help
develop new connections.
Although compassion is typically other-focused, t here is growing litera
ture on directing compassion toward the self, that is, self-compassion.
Zessin, Dickhäuser, and Garbade’s (2015) recent meta-analysis shows that
self-compassion is strongly associated with well-being, particularly psycho-
logical and cognitive well-being. A few studies recommend self-compassion
as a strategy to combat compassion fatigue, that is, burnout experienced by
employees in helping professions such as nursing. For example, a study of
student counselors and student cognitive behavioral psychotherapists found
that self-compassionate individuals experienced less compassion fatigue
(Beaumont, Durkin, Martin, & Carson, 2016). In addition to enhancing
individual well-being, self-compassion is also shown to enhance relational
well-being. For example, self-compassionate c ouples exhibit more positive
relationship behaviors such as being more caring and supportive t oward
each other compared to t hose lacking in self-compassion (Neff & Beretvas,
2013). Further, in times of conflict with f amily, friends, and romantic part-
ners, individuals higher in self-compassion tend to compromise rather than
subordinate or self-prioritize their needs and therefore have higher levels
of relational well-being (Yarnell & Neff, 2013). Thus, self-compassion is not
only associated with personal well-being but also healthy interpersonal rela-
tionships. Thus, both compassion and self-compassion have important
positive relational consequences.
Resilience. Resilience refers to “patterns of positive adaptation in the
context of past and present adversity” (Riley & Masten, 2005, p. 13; Wright &
Masten, 2005, p. 16). A wealth of empirical evidence shows that resilience
is associated with psychological well-being (Burns, Anstey, & Windsor,
2011; Christopher & Kulig, 2000), positive emotions (Cohn, Fredrickson,
Brown, Mikels, & Conway, 2009; Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004), workplace
well-being and performance (Wanberg & Banas, 2000; Youssef & Luthans,
2007), self-compassion (Neff & McGehee, 2010), and forgiveness (Tuck &
Anderson, 2014).
As human interactions occur across interpersonal, social, and cultural
levels, each of t hese relationships has the capacity to foster resilience for the
individual as well as the relational unit (Ungar, 2012). For instance, among
couples, sharing “we-stories” helps promote meaning and purpose in life
among individuals (Singer & Skerett, 2014). Further, the sense of shared
identity from a “we-ness” fosters relational resilience by generating positive
emotion, restoring commitment, and reducing conflict (Singer & Skerett,
2014). Similarly, resilience can be conceptualized at the family, group, and
community levels. Key processes such as clear communication (e.g., shar-
ing meaning regarding stressors or crises), problem solving (e.g., collabo-
rating to develop a strategy), and adaptation (e.g., modifying family rules)
can help families build resilience in the face of challenges and fortify the
family as a relational unit (Sheridan, Sjuts, & Coutts, 2013). Despite the crit-
icality of the environment and systemic influences in the development of
resilience in individuals, this area of inquiry remains understudied. For
instance, Masten and Monn (2015) note that studies on child resilience
do not adequately account for and integrate theory, findings, and implica-
tions of family resilience, even though there is a bidirectional relationship
between individual and familial resilience. We encourage future positive
psychological research on relational contexts of individual resilience and
resilience of the relationships themselves.
Forgiveness. Research shows that forgiveness predicts a host of positive
outcomes such as an increase in meaning in life over time (e.g., among inti-
mate partners) (Van Tongeren et al., 2015), life satisfaction (e.g., for indi-
viduals postdivorce) (Yárnoz-Yaben, Garmendia, & Comino, 2016), hope
(e.g., Yalçın & Malkoç, 2015), and lower risk f actors such as reduced anger,
anxiety, and depression (Thompson et al., 2005). Further, forgiveness is
associated with positive relational processes such as prosocial behavior
(Karremans, Van Lange, & Holland, 2005) and gratitude (e.g., Ramírez,
Ortega, Chamorro, & Colmenero, 2014).
Although the nature of forgiveness is “bounded in relationships” (Maio,
Fincham, & Carnelley, 2008), most forgiveness research is conducted at an
individual level of analysis (Bies, Barclay, Tripp, & Aquino, 2016; Parga-
ment, McCullough, & Thoresen, 2000). A focus primarily on the individ-
ual neglects the relational aspect of forgiveness and thus the demonstration
of how forgiveness plays out in a relational context. In order to address this,
Bies, Barclay, Tripp, and Aquino (2016) recommend event-based, experience
sampling methodologies, diary studies, and longitudinal methodologies. For
example, a longitudinal examination of the effect of forgiveness on mean-
ing among couples found that those individuals who regularly forgave their
partner had higher meaning in life over time (Van Tongeren et al., 2015).
Further, f amily dynamics and types of f amily relationships play an impor
tant role in influencing the antecedents and consequences of forgiving
(Maio, Fincham, & Carnelley, 2008). Thus, constructs such as forgiveness
need to be understood within the complex dynamics of the relationships.

Similarly, t here is a need for research on forgiveness across domains such
as parent-child dyads, coworkers, supervisor-subordinate, and the like.
Relationships and Positive Institutions

Positive institutions are those that provide the context in which positive
traits can be developed and positive states can be experienced. As such
institutional contexts offer the natural relational space where positive traits
and experiences can be fostered. Next, we examine a few oft-studied insti-
tutional relationships that foster development of positive qualities.
Coaching. Coaching is a dyadic relationship established between coach
and the coachee for the purpose of achieving desired personal and pro-
fessional outcomes (Spence & Grant, 2007). The success of coaching can
vary based on its purpose. A wealth of research shows that coaching can
improve goal attainment, well-being, hope (Green, Oades, & Grant, 2006),
resilience (Grant, Curtayne & Burton, 2009), self-efficacy (Baron & Morin,
2009), and professional growth (McGuffin & Obonyo, 2010). Several recent
meta-analyses that have examined the effect of coaching have found that
they support positive individual outcomes such as improved learning, per
formance, coping, work attitudes, and goal-directed self-regulation (Jones,
Woods, & Guillaume, 2016; Theeboom, Beersma, & van Vianen, 2014). Fur-
ther, they have also been found to improve relationships through behav-
ioral and attitudinal changes in relational contexts (Sonesh et al., 2015).
An emerging theme from these studies is that the success of coaching may
be predicated upon a positive coaching relationship. For example, clients’
development of self-efficacy and the number of coaching sessions received
are mediated by the quality of the coaching relationship (Baron & Morin,
2009). Similarly, clients show better coaching results if they consider their
coach friendly and attentive (de Haan, Duckworth, Birch, & Jones, 2013). As
such, the coaching relationship is central to positive coaching outcomes.
Positive mentoring. Traditional research on mentoring (i.e., between
mentor and mentee) in the workplace has focused on relationship qualities,
characteristics, and outcomes of mentoring in terms of the protégés’ typical
experiences (e.g., career outcomes, career advancement, and organizational
commitment; see review by Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz, & Lima, 2004) (Kram,
1985; Ragins, 1989). Rarely has the focus been on high-quality mentoring
experiences from the mentors’ perspective, even though these seem to be
some of the most valuable relationships in their lives (Ragins & Verbos, 2007).
The positive relational mentoring approach combats this issue by offering a
developmental framework to assess mutual growth, learning, and develop-
ment in mentoring relationships (Ragins, 2005; Ragins & Verbos, 2007).
One aspect of high-quality mentoring relationships consists of relational

caches, which are passed between members of the relationship. Th ese are
relational skills and competencies that transfer across time, relationships,
and settings (Kram & Ragins, 2007). Not only do these relational caches
function across relationships in the workplace, but they also extend to other
individuals in one’s social networks (Higgins & Kram, 2001). In addition,
six key relational functions may result from high-quality mentoring rela-
tionships: (1) personal learning and growth, (2) inspiration, (3) affirmation
of selves, (4) reliance on communal norms, (5) shared influence and mutual
respect, and (6) relational trust and commitment (see Ragins, 2011). Taken
together, high-quality mentoring relationships set the stage for a swath of
beneficial outcomes in positive relationship research, including psycholog-
ical capital (PsyCap), thriving, flourishing, and resilience, among others
(Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2008; Keyes & Haidt, 2003; Luthans, Youssef, &
Avolio, 2007; Spreitzer, Sutcliffe, Dutton, Sonenshein, & Grant, 2005).
Although scant, some evidence suggests that mentors report revitaliza-
tion, social recognition, and personal fulfillment from their relationships
with mentees (Allen, Poteet, & Burroughs, 1997; Bozionelos, 2004; Mullen &
Noe, 1999; Ragins & Scandura, 1999). However, little is known about the
mutual benefits of the mentor-mentee relationship. We suggest that the
examination of positive mentoring relationships that spur mutual relation-
ship growth in terms of positive psychological constructs (e.g., PsyCap; psy-
chological capital) are ripe areas for investigation. F uture research on
positive relationships should empirically investigate the effects of the rela-
tional cache cycle on both the mentor and mentee, since relational men-
toring may ignite an iterative process of “broaden and build” within the
mentor and mentees social networks (Kram & Ragins, 2007). Likewise,
research would also benefit from examining whether high-quality mentor-
ing relationships spur other high-quality relationships outside of the orga
nizational context. Th ese areas of future research have implications for
uncovering the advantages of relational mentoring, with the mentoring site
serving as the foundation for positive relationships both at the dyadic level
of analysis and within the larger social network system.
High-quality connections at work. The concept of high-quality con-
nections (HQCs) is inspired from relational theory, with its emphasis on
human growth and development occurring in connection with, and not
separated from, other people (Miller, 2015). Stephens, Heaphy, and Dutton
(2012) operationalize HQCs as short-term dyadic interactions that are pos-
itive in terms of the individuals’ subjective experiences and structural features
of the connections. A wealth of extant research demonstrates that HQCs lead
to positive outcomes. For instance, HQCs provide health benefits in terms
of the cardiovascular, neuroendocrine, and immune systems (Heaphy &
Dutton, 2008). As such, HQCs have been found to help employees recover
from illness or those who are suffering from loss (Lilius et al., 2008; Ragins
& Verbos, 2007). HQCs also improve individual functioning by enhancing
cognitive, physiological, and behavioral processes, including working
memory performance (Stephens, Heaphy, & Dutton, 2012; Ybarra et al.,
2008). In one study, 212 undergraduate and graduate students w ere surveyed
at two separate time points (three weeks apart), in order to understand the
relationship between HQCs, psychological safety, and organizational learn-
ing. The results demonstrated that, both directly and indirectly (through
the mechanism of psychological safety), the experience of HQCs was asso-
ciated with organizational learning behaviors over time (Carmeli, Brueller,
Dutton, 2009). Th
ese findings suggest that HQCs in organizations may serve
as key relational processes that foster perceived employee health, psycho-
logical well-being and organizational learning. Hence, this has implications
for HQCs in the context of relational formation, especially in organizations,
and suggests that HQCs should be present at the site and during the initia-
tion of positive relationships.
POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY’S CONTRIBUTIONS

TO RELATIONSHIP RESEARCH
In recent years, the emerging field of positive psychology has offered a
fresh perspective to relationship theories and research. In particular, close
relationship research has benefited from adopting a positive and proactive
stance (e.g., relationship-enhancing processes), as a complement to the
dominant deficits-based approach (i.e., conflict reduction). In this section,
we examine a few emerging research areas that have developed at the con-
fluence of positive psychology and relationship research.
Positive capitalization. In general, most people are fortunate to expe-
rience positive events more often than negative events (ratio of 3:1; Gable &
Haidt, 2005). The act of making the most out of, or capitalizing on, t hese
positive events, that is, positive capitalization, is a positive dyadic relational
process that predicts positive affect, well-being, and self-esteem (Gable &
Gosnell, 2011; Langston, 1994). Specifically, the process of positive capital-
ization occurs when an individual tells another about a positive event, and
is met with a response that reinforces and validates the individual and the
event as being positive and worthy (Gable, Gonzaga, & Strachman, 2006;
Gable, Reis, Impett, & Asher, 2004). In a daily experience study, it was found
that t here is a 70 to 80 percent chance that an individual would disclose to
another about a positive event in their day, and 97 percent of p eople who share
positive events do so with close relationship partners (Gable & Gosnell, 2011;
Gable et al., 2004). Although disclosure of positive events to close relationship
partners is important, the specific response is equally important for the
effects of relational well-being (Gable & Gosnell, 2011). One important type
of response, for example, active-constructive response (i.e., reacting to a

positive event enthusiastically), has been shown to be the most impactful in
increasing positive affect and well-being of the discloser, above and beyond
the discloser’s initial rating of the positive event (Gable et al., 2006).
In an experimental study on capitalization, participants that received an
active-constructive response from a confederate in response to a positive
event increased their ratings of the importance of that event, whereas no
increase was seen in participants in the passive response condition (Reis
et al., 2010). In another study on perceived partner responsiveness, for men
and women, perceived responsiveness ratings of a positive event predicted
relationship health at a follow-up (Gable & Gosnell, 2011). Thus, in inter-
personal relationships in which positive capitalization occurs frequently,
partners enjoy relationship well-being and growth (Gable et al., 2004).
Positive capitalization enhances the positive affect of both partners above
and beyond the joy brought on by the positive event itself (Gable et al.,
2006). Thus, frequent positive capitalizations can establish relationship-
enhancing interaction patterns that may have favorable consequences for
relationship maintenance and stability in the long term. In summary,
research on positive capitalization highlights how the actions of each
partner in a relationship can help cultivate relational well-being, and how
partners can improve their connection with each other when t hings are
going right.
Michelangelo phenomenon. In addition to celebrating positive events
in each others’ lives (as witnessed in positive capitalization), partners can
also bring out the best in each other. Renowned 16th-century Italian artist
and sculptor, Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni, famously
described his approach to sculpting as one not of creation of something
new, but of revealing the ideal figure that already exists within a marble
block. Drawing from this view, the Michelangelo phenomenon on describes
how individuals in relationships play an important role in bringing out the
best in each other and shaping each other’s skills, traits, and ideal-self goals
(Higgins, 1987). Although this concept has been applied to various types
of relationships such as kin, friends, and colleagues, the Michelangelo phe-
nomenon is most profoundly witnessed in close interpersonal relationships
(Rusbult, Finkel, & Kumashiro, 2009).
In healthy relationships, partners often influence each other to move
toward their ideal selves (Gosnell & Gable, 2013; Rusbult et al., 2009). This
process unfolds as partners engage in perceptual or behavioral affirmations.
Perceptual affirmation refers to the extent to which one’s partner perceives
one in ways that are congruent to one’s ideal-self, and behavioral affirma-
tion is the extent to which a partner consciously or unconsciously behaves in
ways that elicit one’s ideal behaviors (Rusbult et al., 2009). For instance, in
one study, married couples were recorded disclosing a goal in regard to their
ideal-self. Trained coders documented affirming behaviors (i.e., assistance,
praise for goal pursuits), and at a four-month follow-up, affirmations of goal

relevant conversations predicted likelihood of achieving ideal-self goals
(Rusbult et al., 2009).
In another study, pairs of friends were asked to answer a complementary
questionnaire in which one friend was the “target” (i.e., who rated move-
ment t oward goals and their partner’s affirmation), and the other friend was
the “observer” (i.e., who rated the target’s affirmation of their partner and
the target’s goal pursuits). The analyses revealed that when the observers
found the targets’ partners to be affirming, the targets were significantly
more likely to move toward their ideal selves (Drigotas et al., 1999). Further,
this study found that the affirmations not only helped the targets move
toward their ideal selves, but also improved personal well-being, life satis-
faction, and psychological health (Drigotas, 2002). In addition, when the
partner served as an ally in promoting the ideal-self, the target also enjoyed
enhanced relational well-being. Thus, positive relationships in which part-
ners demonstrate the Michelangelo effect not only serve as the context in
which partners are the primary catalysts of each other’s development, but
also foster relational well-being and growth.
Positive empathy. Empathy, a tendency to vicariously experience anoth-
er’s emotional state (Albeiro, Matricardi, Speltri, & Toso, 2009), is often
constructed as a feeling of concern for unfortunate others (Davis, 1983).
This is a key component and driver of other-focused virtuous behaviors
such as compassionate responding and perspective taking (Davis, 1983),
and as such, is an important area of research relevant to positive psychology.
Despite its many contributions, however, empathy has also been observed
to be constructed as “negative empathy,” such that it is an affective and
cognitive response predicated on the presence of others’ suffering (Morelli,
Lieberman, & Zaki, 2015). This raises the question, is it within the scope of
“empathy” to be responsive to o thers’ positive experiences? Thus, emerg-
ing from a positive emotional perspective, positive empathy is an emerg-
ing construct in positive psychology defined as an individual’s understanding
and vicarious sharing of another individual’s positive emotions (Morelli,
Lieberman, Telzer, & Zaki, under review). An individual could experience
positive empathy by observing someone e lse’s positive event (i.e., watching
someone win a contest), or creating a positive experience for someone
else (i.e., giving someone a present). Further, positive empathy may manifest
as a short-term emotional state or a stable personality trait.
Past research suggests that positive empathy is related to improved pro-
social behavior (Batson et al., 1991; Morelli, Rameson, & Lieberman, 2014;
Smith, Keating, & Stotland, 1989). For instance, in two separate studies,
participants w ere more likely to experience positive empathy when they
were told they would see the recipient of their helping behavior, compared
to when they would not (Batson et al., 1991; Smith, Keating, & Stotland,
1989). Likewise, in another study, participants read about a person in need
they could not help and then chose to hear an update for that person or
someone unrelated. They then received feedback on the likelihood that
the person in need’s situation would improve (20 percent chance of
improvement or 80 percent chance of improvement). The results demon-
strated that the participants w ere more likely to watch the video with the
higher probability of improvement (Batson et al., 1991). This is indicative
of the association between positive empathy and prosocial behavior. Neu-
ropsychological evidence also supports this—when the septal area (i.e.,
brain reward center) is activated during positive empathy, helping behav
iors are more predictable between strangers (Morelli et al., 2014).
Positive empathy also has a positive impact on social relationships
and well-being. Three studies show that positive empathy is associated with
increased relationship satisfaction, commitment, intimacy, and trust (Gable
et al., 2004; Gable et al., 2006; Gable, Gosnell, Maisel, & Strachman, 2012).
In one study, verbal and nonverbal expressions of positive empathy in couples
predicted decreased likelihood of breaking up two months later and
increased relationship well-being. Although the research in this area is
nascent, there also appears to be a link between positive empathy and gen-
eral well-being (Cohn, Fredrickson, Brown, Mikels, & Conway, 2009). Posi-
tive empathy may improve empathizers’ personal resources (i.e., hope) as a
result of learning about and sharing in another’s positive event, which can
later be used to manage future opportunities and stressors (Cohn et al.,
2009). Trait positive empathy has also been shown to positively predict trait
life satisfaction (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985).
Taken together, the research on positive empathy provides promise for
f uture work on positive relationships. F
uture research would benefit from
a focus on the bidirectional association of positive empathy at the dyadic
level (i.e., how much empathy both relationship partners feel toward one
another). Further, it would be useful to examine the impact on the recipi-
ent and giver of positive empathy. Applied research could examine the
impact of positive empathy in coach-coachee and mentor-mentee relation-
ships. Finally, dyadic relationships serve as a ripe context for evaluating
positive empathy’s various manifestations, at the initiation, development,
and outcome phases of positive relationships.
CONCLUSION
This review demonstrates that the positive psychological perspective has
been used in various types of research on dyadic relationships (e.g., romantic,
parents and children, coaches and coachees; Cramer, 2003; Gable et al.,
2004; Gottman & Silver, 1999; Magyar-Moe, 2011; Morry & Kito, 2009;
Stafford, 2011). Many positive states and other-focused stable traits are
cultivated and nurtured in the relational context. Similarly, institutional
contexts offer a ripe space for cultivation of positive relationships. Fur-

ther, emerging research at the intersection of positive psychology and
relationship research, that is, the study of the positive psychology of rela-
tionships, are shedding light on new ways in which partners can bring out
the best in each other and constructively share in each other’s joy. Thus,
the positive psychological lens in relationship theory and research has
provided insight into novel aspects of relational growth and well-being.
We call for f uture research to more deeply explore how the positive psy
chology of relationships can better help individuals and their relation-
ships to thrive.
REFERENCES
Albeiro, P., Matricardi, G., Speltri, D., & Toso, D. (2009). The assessment of empa-
thy in adolescence: A contribution to the Italian validation of “The Basic
Empathy Scale.” Journal of Adolescence, 32, 393–408.
Algoe, S. B., & Haidt, J. (2009). Witnessing excellence in action: The ‘other-praising’
emotions of elevation, gratitude, and admiration. The Journal of Positive Psy
chology, 4(2), 105–127.
Algoe, S. B., Haidt, J., & Gable, S. L. (2008). Beyond reciprocity: Gratitude and rela-
tionships in everyday life. Emotion, 8(3), 425.
Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., Poteet, M. L., Lentz, E., & Lima, L. (2004). Career benefits
associated with mentoring for protégés: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied
Allen, T. D., Poteet, M. L., & Burroughs, S. M. (1997). The mentor’s perspective:
A qualitative inquiry and f uture research agenda. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 51, 70–89.
Argyle, M. (2001). The psychology of happiness. London: Routledge.
Ballas, D., & Dorling, D. (2007). Measuring the impact of major life events upon
happiness. International Journal of Epidemiology, 36(6), 1244.
Barak, Y. (2006). The immune system and happiness. Autoimmunity Reviews, 5,
523–527.
Baron, L., & Morin, L. (2009). The coach-coachee relationship in executive coach-
ing: A field study. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 20(1), 85–106.
Bartlett, M. Y., & DeSteno, D. (2006). Gratitude and prosocial behavior: Helping
when it costs you. Psychological Science, 17(4), 319–325.
Batson, C. D., Batson, J. G., Slingsby, J. K., Harrell, K. L., Peekna, H. M., & Todd, R. M.
(1991). Empathic joy and the empathy-a ltruism hypothesis. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 61(3), 413.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interper-
sonal attachments as a fundamental h uman motivation. Psychological Bul-
letin, 117, 497–529.
Beaumont, E., Durkin, M., Martin, C. J. H., & Carson, J. (2016). Compassion for
others, self-compassion, quality of life and mental well-being measures and
their association with compassion fatigue and burnout in student midwives:

A quantitative survey. Midwifery, 34, 239–244.
Berry, D. S., & Hansen, J. S. (1996). Positive affect, negative affect, and social inter-
action. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 71(4).
Berry, D. S., Willingham, J. K., & Thayer, C. A. (2000). Affect and personality as
predictors of conflict and closeness in young adults’ friendships. Journal of
Research in Personality, 34(1), 84–107. doi:10.1006/jrpe.1999.2271
Berscheid, E. (2003). The human’s greatest strength: Other h umans. In L. G. Aspin-
wall, U. M. Staudinger, L. G. Aspinwall, & U. M. Staudinger (Eds.), A psy
chology of h
uman strengths: Fundamental questions and future directions
for a positive psychology (pp. 37–47). Washington, DC: American Psycho-
logical Association. doi:10.1037/10566-003
Bies, R. J., Barclay, L. J., Tripp, T. M., & Aquino, K. (2016). A systems perspective
on forgiveness in organizations. The Academy of Management Annals, 10(1),
245–318.
Bluckert, P. (2005). Critical factors in executive coaching—The coaching relation-
ship. Industrial and Commercial Training, 37(7), 336–340.
Bozionelos, N. (2004). Mentoring provided: Relation to mentor’s career success,
personality, and mentoring received. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64,
24–46.
Brewer, M. B., & Caporael, L. R. (1990). Selfish genes vs. selfish p eople: Sociobiol-
ogy as origin myth. Motivation and Emotion, 14, 237–243.
Burger, J. M., & Caldwell, D. F. (2000). Personality, social activities, job-search
behavior and interview success: Distinguishing between PANAS trait pos-
itive affect and NEO extraversion. Motivation and Emotion, 24(1), 51–62.
doi:10.1023/A:1005539609679
Burns, R. A., Anstey, K. J., & Windsor, T. D. (2011). Subjective well-being mediates
the effects of resilience and mastery on depression and anxiety in a large
community sample of young and middle-aged adults. Australian and New
Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 45(3), 240–248.
Buss, D. M., & Kenrick, D. T. (1998). Evolutionary social psychology. In D. T. Gil-
bert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology
(4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 982–1026). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Caporael, L. R. (1997). The evolution of truly social cognition: The core configura-
tions model. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 276–298.
Carmeli, A., Brueller, D., & Dutton, J. E. (2009). Learning behaviours in the work-
place: The role of high-quality interpersonal relationships and psychologi-
cal safety. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 26(1), 81–98.
Chang, Y. P., Lin, Y. C., & Chen, L. H. (2012). Pay it forward: Gratitude in social
networks. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13(5), 761–781.
Christopher, K. A., & Kulig, J. C. (2000). Determinants of psychological well-
being in Irish immigrants. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 22(2),
123–143.
Cohn, M. A., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2006). Beyond the moment, beyond the self:
Shared ground between selective investment theory and the broaden-and-
build theory of positive emotions. Psychological Inquiry, 17(1), 39–44.
Cohn, M. A., Fredrickson, B. L., Brown, S. L., Mikels, J. A., & Conway, A. M. (2009).
Happiness unpacked: Positive emotions increase life satisfaction by build-
ing resilience. Emotion, 9(3), 361.
Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In
J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolution-
ary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 163–228). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Cramer, D. (2003). Facilitativeness, conflict, demand for approval, self-esteem, and
satisfaction with romantic relationships. The Journal of Psychology, 137(1),
85–98.
Crocker, J., & Canevello, A. (2008). Creating and undermining social support in
communal relationships: The role of compassionate and self-image goals.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(3), 555–575. doi:10.1037
/0022-3514.95.3.555
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). The mythic potential of evolution. Zygon, 35(1),
25–38.
Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a
multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
44(1), 113–126.
de Haan, E., Duckworth, A., Birch, D., & Jones, C. (2013). Executive coaching out-
come research: The contribution of common factors such as relationship,
personality match, and self-efficacy. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice
and Research, 65(1), 40–57. doi:10.1037/a0031635
Demir, M. (2008). Sweetheart, you really make me happy: Romantic relationship
quality and personality as predictors of happiness among emerging adults.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(2), 257–277.
Demır, M., & Weitekamp, L. A. (2007). I am so happy ’cause today I found my friend:
Friendship and personality as predictors of happiness. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 8(2), 181–211.
Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2008). Happiness: Unlocking the mysteries of psy-
chological wealth. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2016). Advances and open questions in the
science of subjective well-being. Unpublished manuscript. University of
Virginia.
Diener, E., & Seligman, M. P. (2009). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-
being. In E. Diener (Eds.), The science of well-being: The collected works of
Ed Diener (pp. 201–265). New York: Springer Science + Business Media.
Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with
life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.
Diener, E., Heintzelman, S. J., Kushlev, K., Tay, L., Wirtz, D., Lutes, L. D., & Oishi,
S. (2016). Findings all psychologists should know from the new science on sub-
jective well being. Canadian Psychology. Advance online publication.
Dorling, D., & Ballas, D. (2008). Spatial divisions of poverty and wealth. In T. Ridge
& S. Wright (Eds.) Understanding poverty, wealth and inequality: Policies
and prospects (pp. 103–134). Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Isen, A. M., Rust, M., & Guerra, P. (1998). Positive
affect, cognition, and the reduction of intergroup bias. In C. Sedikides,
J. Schopler, & C. Insko (Eds.), Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior

(pp. 337–366). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Drigotas, S. M. (2002). The Michelangelo phenomenon and personal well-being.
Journal of Personality, 70(1), 59–77.
Drigotas, S. M., Rusbult, C. E., Wieselquist, J., & Whitton, S. W. (1999). Close part-
ner as sculptor of the ideal self: Behavioral affirmation and the Michelan-
gelo phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(2), 293.
Dutton, J. E., Workman, K. M., & Hardin, A. E. (2014). Compassion at work.
Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior,
1277–1304. doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091221
Emmons, R. A., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Counting blessings versus burdens:
An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in
daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 377–389.
Fehr, B., Harasymchuk, C., & Sprecher, S. (2014). Compassionate love in romantic
relationships: A review and some new findings. Journal of Social and Per-
sonal Relationships, 31(5), 575–600. doi:10.1177/0265407514533768
Fergus, K., & Skerrett, K. (2015). Resilient couple coping revisited: Building rela-
tionship muscle. In K. Skerrett, K. Fergus, K. Skerrett, & K. Fergus (Eds.),
Couple resilience: Emerging perspectives (pp. 199–210). New York: Springer
Science + Business Media.
Figley, C. R. (2002). Compassion fatigue: Psychotherapists’ chronic lack of self care.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58(11), 1433–1441.
Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. H. (2010). Of memes and marriage: Toward a positive
relationship science. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 2(1), 4–24. doi:10
.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00033.x
Fischer, R. L., & Beimers, D. (2009). “Put me in, Coach”: A pilot evaluation of exec-
utive coaching in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit Management and Leader-
ship, 19(4), 507–522.
Fitness, J., & Williams, V. (2013). The features and functions of positive emotions
in close relationships. In M. Hojjat, D. Cramer, M. Hojjat, & D. Cramer
(Eds.), Positive psychology of love (pp. 44–56). New York: Oxford University
Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199791064.003.0004
Fredickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology. Amer-
ican Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226.
Gable, S. L., Gonzaga, G. C., & Strachman, A. (2006). Will you be there for me when
things go right? Supportive responses to positive event disclosures. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(5), 904.
Gable, S. L., & Gosnell, C. L. (2011). The positive side of close relationships. In
K. M. Sheldon, T. B. Kashdan, M. F. Steger, K. M. Sheldon, T. B. Kashdan, &
M. F. Steger (Eds.), Designing positive psychology: Taking stock and moving
forward (pp. 265–279). New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acp
rof:oso/9780195373585.003.0017
Gable, S. L., Gosnell, C. L., Maisel, N. C., & Strachman, A. (2012). Safely testing
the alarm: Close o thers’ responses to personal positive events. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 103(6), 963–981. doi:10.1037/a0029488
Gable, S. L., & Haidt, J. (2005). What (and why) is positive psychology? Review of
General Psychology, 9(2), 103–110. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.9.2.103
Gable, S. L., Reis, H. T., Impett, E. A., & Asher, E. R. (2004). What do you do when
t hings go right? The intrapersonal and interpersonal benefits of sharing
positive events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 228.
Gosnell, C. L., & Gable, S. L. (2013). Attachment and capitalizing on positive events.
Attachment & Human Development, 15(3), 281–302. doi:10.1080/14616734
.2013.782655
Gottman, J., & Silver, N. (1999). The seven principles for making marriage work:
A practical guide from the country’s foremost relationship expert. Harmony.
Graham, C., & Pettinato, S. (2002). Frustrated achievers: Winners, losers and sub-
jective well-being in new market economies. Journal of Development Stud-
ies, 38(4), 100–140.
Grant, A. M., Curtayne, L., & Burton, G. (2009). Executive coaching enhances goal
attainment, resilience and workplace well-being: A randomised controlled
study. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(5), 396–407.
Green, L. S., Oades, L. G., & Grant, A. M. (2006). Cognitive-behavioral, solution-
focused life coaching: Enhancing goal striving, well-being, and hope. The
Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(3), 142–149.
Gyllensten, K., & Palmer, S. (2007). The coaching relationship: An interpretive
phenomenological analysis. International Coaching Psychology Review, 2,
168–177.
Heaphy, E. D., & Dutton, J. E. (2008). Positive social interactions and the h uman
body at work: Linking organizations and physiology. Academy of Manage-
ment Review, 33(1), 137–162.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psycho-
logical Review, 94(3), 319.
Higgins, M. C., & Kram, K. E. (2001). Reconceptualizing mentoring at work:
A developmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review,
26(2), 264–288.
Ianiro, P. M., Schermuly, C. C., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). Why interpersonal dominance
and affiliation matter: An interaction analysis of the coach-client rela-
tionship. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and
Practice, 6(1), 25–46.
International Coaching Federation. Retrieved from https://w ww.coachfederation
.org/.
Jones, R. J., Woods, S. A., & Guillaume, Y. R. (2016). The effectiveness of workplace
coaching: A meta-analysis of learning and performance outcomes from
coaching. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89,
249–277.
Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in the measurement of sub-
jective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 3–24. doi:10
.1257/089533006776526030
Karremans, J. C., Van Lange, P. A., & Holland, R. W. (2005). Forgiveness and its
associations with prosocial thinking, feeling, and d oing beyond the relation-
ship with the offender. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(10),
1315–1326.
Keyes, C. L. M. (1998). Social well-being. Social Psychology Quarterly, 121–140.
Keyes, C. L. M., & Haidt, J. (Eds.). (2003). Flourishing: Positive psychology and the
life well lived. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Killen, A., & Macaskill, A. (2015). Using a gratitude intervention to enhance well-
being in older adults. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(4), 947–964.
Kirby, J. N. (2016). The role of mindfulness and compassion in enhancing nurtur-
ing family environments. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 23(2),
142–157.
Kombarakaran, F. A., Yang, J. A., Baker, M. N., & Fernandes, P. B. (2008). Executive
coaching: It works! Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,
60(1), 78.
Kram, K. E. (1985). Improving the mentoring process. Training & Development
Journal.
Kram, K. E., & Ragins, B. R. (2007). The landscape of mentoring in the 21st century.
In B. R. Ragins & K. E. Kram (Eds.), The handbook of mentoring at work:
Theory, research and practice (pp. 659–692). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Krause, N. (2007). Longitudinal study of social support and meaning in life. Psy
chology and Aging, 22(3), 456.
Kruse, E., Chancellor, J., Ruberton, P. M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2014). An upward spi-
ral between gratitude and humility. Social Psychological and Personality
Science, 5(7), 805–814.
Langston, C. A. (1994). Capitalizing on and coping with daily-life events: Expres-
sive responses to positive events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol
ogy, 67(6), 1112.
Lilius, J. M., Worline, M. C., Maitlis, S., Kanov, J., Dutton, J. E., & Frost, P. (2008).
The contours and consequences of compassion at work. Journal of Orga
nizational Behavior, 29(2), 193–218.
Lim, D., & DeSteno, D. (2016). Suffering and compassion: The links among adverse
life experiences, empathy, compassion, and prosocial behavior. Emotion,
16(2), 175–182. doi:10.1037/emo0000144
Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capital: Developing
the human competitive edge. New York: Oxford University Press.
Luthar, S. S. (2003). Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of child-
hood adversities. Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, R. F., Mickelson, K. D., S ullivan, M. J., & Coyne, J. C. (1998). Coping as a com-
munal process. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(5), 579–605.
Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect:
Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855.
Magyar-Moe, J. L. (2011). Incorporating positive psychology content and applica-
tions into various psychology courses. The Journal of Positive Psychology,
6(6), 451–456.
Maio, G. R., Thomas, G., Fincham, F. D., & Carnelley, K. B. (2008). Unraveling the
role of forgiveness in family relationships. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 94(2), 307.
Maniaci, M. R., & Reis, H. T. (2010). The marriage of positive psychology and rela-
tionship science: A reply to Fincham and Beach. Journal of Family Theory
& Review, 2(1), 47–53. doi:10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00037.x
Martela, F., & Steger, M. F. (2016). The three meanings of meaning in life: Distin-
guishing coherence, purpose, and significance. The Journal of Positive Psy
chology, 11(5), 531–545.
Masten, A. S., & Monn, A. R. (2015). Child and family resilience: A call for integrated
science, practice, and professional training. Family Relations, 64(1), 5–21.
McGuffin, A. A., & Obonyo, E. (2010). Enhancing performance: A case study of the
effects of employee coaching in construction practice. Construction Man-
agement and Economics, 28(2), 141–149.
Miller, J. B. (2015). The healing connection: How w omen form relationships in ther-
apy and in life. Beacon Press.
Morelli, S. A., Lieberman, M. D., Telzer, E. H., & Zaki, J. (under review). Positive
empathy: Its structure and relation to prosociality, social connection, and
well-being.
Morelli, S. A., Lieberman, M. D., & Zaki, J. (2015). The emerging study of positive
empathy. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9(2), 57–68.
Morelli, S. A., Rameson, L. T., & Lieberman, M. D. (2014). The neural components
of empathy: Predicting daily prosocial behavior. Social Cognitive and Affec-
tive Neuroscience, 9(1), 39–47. doi:10.1093/scan/nss088
Morry, M. M., & Kito, M. (2009). Relational-interdependent self-construal as a pre-
dictor of relationship quality: The mediating roles of one’s own behaviors
and perceptions of the fulfillment of friendship functions. The Journal of
Social Psychology, 149(3), 305–322.
Mullen, E. J., & Noe, R. A. (1999). The mentoring information exchange: When do
mentors seek information from their protégés? Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 20, 233–242.
Neff, K. D., & Beretvas, S. N. (2013). The role of self-compassion in romantic rela-
tionships. Self and Identity, 12(1), 78–98. doi:10.1080/15298868.2011.639548
Neff, K. D., & McGehee, P. (2010). Self-compassion and psychological resilience
among adolescents and young adults. Self and Identity, 9(3), 225–240.
Pargament, K. I., McCullough, M. E., & Thoresen, C. E. (2000). The frontier of
forgiveness: Seven directions for psychological study and practice. In
M. E. McCullough, K. I. Pargament, & C. E. Thoresen, (Eds.), Forgiveness:
Theory, research and practice (pp. 299–319). New York: Guilford Press.
Peterson, C. (2006). A primer in positive psychology. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Peterson, C., Park, N., & Seligman, M. E. (2005). Orientations to happiness and life
satisfaction: The full life versus the empty life. Journal of Happiness Stud-
ies, 6(1), 25–41.
Pressman, S. D., & Cohen, S. (2005). Does positive affect influence health? Psychologi-
cal Bulletin, 131, 925–971. Retrieved from http://d x.doi.org/10.1037/0 033
-2909.131.6.925
Ragins, B. R. (1989). Barriers to mentoring: The female manager’s dilemma. Human
Relations, 42, 1–22.
Ragins, B. R. (2005). Towards a theory of relational mentoring. Unpublished
manuscript.
Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1999). Burden or blessing? Expected costs and ben-
efits of being a mentor. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 493–509.
Ragins, B. R., & Verbos, A. K. (2007). Positive relationships in action: Relational

mentoring and mentoring schemas in the workplace. In J. Dutton & B. R.
Ragins (Eds.), Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoreti-
cal and research foundation (pp. 91–116). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ramírez, E., Ortega, A. R., Chamorro, A., & Colmenero, J. M. (2014). A program of
positive intervention in the elderly: Memories, gratitude and forgiveness.
Aging & Mental Health, 18(4), 463–470.
Reich, J. W., Zautra, A. J., & Hall, J. S. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of adult resilience.
Guilford Press.
In C. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life
well-lived (pp. 129–159). Washington, DC: American Psychological Asso-
ciation. doi:10.1037/10594-006
Reis, H. T., Smith, S. M., Carmichael, C. L., Caprariello, P. A., Tsai, F. F., Rodrigues,
A., & Maniaci, M. R. (2010). Are you happy for me? How sharing positive
events with o thers provides personal and interpersonal benefits. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 99(2), 311.
Riley, J. R., & Masten, A. S. (2005). Resilience in context. In Resilience in children,
families, and communities (pp. 13–25). Springer.
Rusbult, C. E., Finkel, E. J., & Kumashiro, M. (2009). The Michelangelo phenome-
non. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(6), 305–309.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revis-
ited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727. doi:10
.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719
Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduc-
tion. The American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14.
Seligman, M. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and
well-being. New York: F ree Press.
Sheridan, S. M., Sjuts, T. M., & Coutts, M. J. (2013). Understanding and promoting
the development of resilience in families. In Handbook of resilience in
children (pp. 143–160). Springer.
Singer, J. A., & Skerrett, K. (2014). Positive couple therapy: Using we-stories to
enhance resilience. Routledge.
Sonesh, S. C., Coultas, C. W., Lacerenza, C. N., Marlow, S. L., Benishek, L. E., &
Salas, E. (2015). The power of coaching: A meta-a nalytic investigation.
Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 8(2),
73–95. doi:10.1080/17521882.2015.1071418
Spence, G. B., & Grant, A. M. (2007). Professional and peer life coaching and
the enhancement of goal striving and well-being: An exploratory study.
The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(3), 185–194. doi:10.1080/174397607
01228896
Spreitzer, G., Sutcliffe, K., Dutton, J., Sonenshein, S., & Grant, A. M. (2005).
A socially embedded model of thriving at work. Organization Science, 16,
537–549.
Stafford, L. (2011). Measuri ng relationship maintenance behaviors: Critique and
development of the revised relationship maintenance behavior scale. Jour-
nal of Social and Personal Relationships, 28(2), 278–303.
Steger, M. F., Oishi, S., & Kesebir, S. (2011). Is a life without meaning satisfying?
The moderating role of the search for meaning in satisfaction with life judg-
ments. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 6(3), 173–180.
Stephens, J. P., Heaphy, E. D., Carmeli, A., Spreitzer, G. M., & Dutton, J. E. (2013).
Relationship quality and virtuousness: Emotional carrying capacity as a
source of individual and team resilience. The Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science, 49(1), 13–41.
Stephens, J. P., Heaphy, E., & Dutton, J. E. (2012). High-quality connections. In
K. S. Cameron, G. M. Spreitzer, K. S. Cameron, & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds.),
The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 385–399).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Tangney, J. P., Stuewig, J., & Mashek, D. J. (2007). What’s moral about the self-
conscious emotions? The self-conscious emotions: Theory and research
(pp. 21–37).
Thompson, L. Y., Snyder, C. R., Hoffman, L., Michael, S. T., Rasmussen, H. N., Bill-
ings, L. S., & Roberts, D. E. (2005). Dispositional forgiveness of self, others,
and situations. Journal of Personality, 73(2), 313–360.
Tomás-Sábado, J., Villavicencio-Chávez, C., Monforte-Royo, C., Guerrero-Torrelles,
M., Fegg, M. J., & Balaguer, A. (2015). What gives meaning in life to patients
with advanced cancer? A comparison between Spanish, German, and Swiss
patients. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 50(6), 861–866.
Tov, W., & Diener, E. (2009). Culture and subjective well-being. In Culture and well-
being (pp. 9–41). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Triplett, K. N., Tedeschi, R. G., Cann, A., Calhoun, L. G., & Reeve, C. L. (2012).
Posttraumatic growth, meaning in life, and life satisfaction in response to
trauma. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 4(4),
400.
Tsang, J. A., Carpenter, T. P., Roberts, J. A., Frisch, M. B., & Carlisle, R. D. (2014).
Why are materialists less happy? The role of gratitude and need satisfac-
tion in the relationship between materialism and life satisfaction. Person-
ality and Individual Differences, 64, 62–66.
Theeboom, T., Beersma, B., & van Vianen, A. M. (2014). Does coaching work?
A meta-a nalysis on the effects of coaching on individual level outcomes in
an organizational context. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(1), 1–18.
doi:10.1080/17439760.2013.837499
Tuck, I., & Anderson, L. (2014). Forgiveness, flourishing, and resilience: The influ-
ences of expressions of spirituality on m ental health recovery. Issues in
Mental Health Nursing, 35(4), 277–282.
Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient individuals use positive emo-
tions to bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 320.
Ungar, M. (2012). Social ecologies and their contribution to resilience. In M. Ungar
(Ed.), The social ecology of resilience: A handbook of theory and practice
(pp. 13–31). New York: Springer Science + Business Media. doi:10.1007
/978-1-4614-0586-3_2
Van Tongeren, D. R., Green, J. D., Hook, J. N., Davis, D. E., Davis, J. L., & Ramos,
M. (2015). Forgiveness increases meaning in life. Social Psychological and
Personality Science, 6(1), 47–55.
Wagner, U., Galli, L., Schott, B. H., Wold, A., van der Schalk, J., Manstead, A. S.
R., . . . Walter, H. (2015). Beautiful friendship: Social sharing of emotions
improves subjective feelings and activates the neural reward circuitry.
Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 10(6), 801–808. doi:10.1093/
scan/nsu121
Wanberg, C. R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to
changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1),
132.
Waugh, C. E., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2006). Nice to know you: Positive emotions,
self-other overlap, and complex understanding in the formation of a new
relationship. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 93–106.
Whelan, D. C., & Zelenski, J. M. (2012). Experimental evidence that positive
moods cause sociability. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(4),
430–437. doi:10.1177/1948550611425194
Wood, A. M., Froh, J. J., & Geraghty, A. W. (2010). Gratitude and well-being: A
review and theoretical integration. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(7),
890–905.
Wright, M. O. D., & Masten, A. S. (2005). Resilience processes in development. In
Handbook of resilience in children (pp. 17–37). Springer.
Yalçın, İ., & Malkoç, A. (2015). The relationship between meaning in life and sub-
jective well-being: Forgiveness and hope as mediators. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 16(4), 915–929.
Yarnell, L. M., & Neff, K. D. (2013). Self-compassion, interpersonal conflict resolu-
tions, and well-being. Self and Identity, 12(2), 146–159.
Yárnoz-Yaben, S., Garmendia, A., & Comino, P. (2016). Looking at the bright side:
Forgiveness and subjective well-being in divorced Spanish parents. Journal
of Happiness Studies, 17(5), 1905–1919. doi:10.1007/s10902-015-9677-x
Ybarra, O., Burnstein, E., Winkielman, P., Keller, M. C., Manis, M., Chan, E., &
Rodriguez, J. (2008). M ental exercising through s imple socializing: Social
interaction promotes general cognitive functioning. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 34(2), 248–259.
Youssef, C. M., & Luthans, F. (2007). Positive organizational behavior in the work-
place: The impact of hope, optimism, and resilience. Journal of Manage-
ment, 33(5), 774–800.
Zessin, U., Dickhäuser, O., & Garbade, S. (2015). The relationship between self-
compassion and well-being: A meta-analysis. Applied Psychology: Health
and Well-Being, 7(3), 340–364.
3
Positive Psychology, Relational
Self-Esteem, and Increasing Well-Being
Christopher J. Mruk
INTRODUCTION
Although they have been described in different ways, the core characteris-
tics of positive psychology center around three general goals so basic to this
field that Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi identified all of them in what
many regard as it earliest “official” publication (2000, p. 5). The first is a
global research focus on positive subjective experience and well-being. The
second is more practically oriented, namely, identifying, researching, and
facilitating the development of positive human qualities and characteris-
tics, including such things as autonomy, courage, and higher human values
or pursuits. The third characteristic is by far the broadest and most ambi-
tious as it concerns understanding the relationship between group behav
ior, such as that found in the f amily, at work, or in social institutions, and
well-being. In this latter sense, positive psychology is also a social psychol
ogy and that means, among other things, it is obliged to work on under-
standing and facilitating healthy interpersonal relationships.
It can be readily demonstrated that positive psychology is making con-
siderable progress toward its first goal. For example, in less than two decades
35
the field has generated a body of work on m ental health (Ryff & Singer,
2002), happiness (Diener & Diener, 1995), flow (Compton, 2005), gratitude
(Emmons & McCullough, 2003), and positive emotions (Fredrickson, 2002),
to name a few areas. Similarly, in a relatively short period of time the field
has also developed a growing collection of practical applications. They con-
cern such t hings as assessing positive personality traits (Seligman & Peter-
son, 2004) as well as increasing well-being through several evidence-based
positive therapies (Duckworth, Steen, & Seligman, 2005). To date, however,
most of positive psychology still focuses much more on individual than on
interpersonal behavior or relationships themselves. Indeed, some progress
is being made in this area as well (Pressman, Kraft, & Cross, 2014), but it
still tends to focus on one participant or the other rather than on relational
dynamics.
One of the reasons for this situation is, of course, that it is much more
difficult to study the reciprocal and interacting dynamics of relational pro
cesses than it is to examine individual ones. For example, s imple models of
causality collapse in the face of the complexities that are often part and
parcel of a relational dynamic or situation. Fortunately, other areas of psy
chology just beginning to be explored by positive psychologists have more
to offer in this regard. One of them is the psychology of self-esteem.
It is true that this work often focuses on understanding negative phe-
nomena, such as how low or problematic forms of self-esteem are con-
nected to difficulties handling stress, anxiety, depression, and relationships
(Mruk, 2013a). But it may surprise some positive psychologists to learn that
the same body of work also routinely explores the positive side of how
healthy self-esteem fosters well-being, including relational well-being. After
all, the field of self-esteem includes a body of psychological work that spans
over a hundred years, consists of over 30,000 publications concerning many
areas of life (Mruk, 2013a), and perhaps until recently is one of the three
most frequently explored covariates written about in social psychology
(Rodewalt & Tragakis, 2003).
In other words, it stands to reason that the psychology of self-esteem can
add to our understanding of positive relationships. Since one of the first
steps in bringing fields together is to appreciate their historical relationship,
let us begin by considering the interface, as well as the lack of it, between
the psychology of self-esteem and positive psychology to date. This approach
also allows us to develop a context for bridging gaps between what we know
about healthy self-esteem in relationships and positive psychology’s interest
in interpersonal well-being. Then we may examine how the psychology of
self-esteem and its work on relationships may advance positive psychology
at the theoretical and practical levels.
Positive Psychology, Relational Self-Esteem, Increasing Well-Being 37
TWO POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGIES

One of the major themes in humanistic psychology is the importance of
self-esteem, especially in relation to m
ental health, self-actualization (or the
lack of it), and well-being in general. However, the relationship between
humanistic and positive psychology can be traced back to the very idea of
positive psychology itself. So clear is this connection that it might even be
more accurate to say that what we call positive psychology t oday actually is
the second major incarnation of this concept in psychology. For example,
over a half a c entury ago Maslow (1954/1970) wrote an entire appendix enti-
tled “Problems Generated by a Positive Approach to Psychology.” Later
humanistic psychologists picked up the same themes he identified when
discussing their emerging field. For instance, the editors of The Journal of
Humanistic Psychology said,
As a “third force” in contemporary psychology it is concerned with topics
having little place in existing theories and systems; e.g., love, creativity, self,
growth, organism, basic need-gratification, self-actualization, higher values,
being, becoming, spontaneity, play, humor, affection, naturalness, warmth,
ego-transcendence, objectivity, autonomy, responsibility, meaning, fairplay,
transcendental experience, peak experience, courage, and related concepts.
(Maslow, 1964, pp. 70–71)
Moreover, humanistic psychology made it clear that it was a response to
some of the same historical conditions that contemporary positive psychol
ogy describes as its primary source of inspiration, namely, traditional psy
chology’s focus on illness and problems or on what is wrong with people
and not their strengths and possibilities or what is right with them.
As a strong case in point, it is important to realize that the same open-
ing paper on positive psychology mentioned earlier paints a strikingly sim-
ilar picture to the one Maslow offered when it describes positive psychology
as a “new” science that is about:
Valued subjective experiences: well-being, contentment, and satisfaction (in
the past); hope and optimism (for the f uture); and flow and happiness (in the
present). At the individual level, it is about positive individual traits: the
capacity for love and vocation, courage, interpersonal skill, aesthetic sensi-
bility, perseverance, forgiveness, originality, f uture mindedness, spirituality,
high talent, and wisdom. At the group level, it is about the civic virtues and
the institutions that move individuals toward better citizenship: responsi-
bility, nurturance, altruism, civility, moderation, tolerance, and work ethic.
(Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000, p. 5)
Even a cursory comparison of the similarities between the two visions of
positive psychology should be enough to convince readers of a historical
connection or at least a similarity.
However, what differentiates the two approaches to positive psychology

is equally important and that is a different focus on methods: Whereas
humanistic psychology is characterized by openness to methodological
diversity, including a heavy reliance on qualitative techniques, the newer
form of positive psychology prides itself as being an empirical endeavor
based on the logical positivism that underlies all of traditional psychology.
Consequently, one way to distinguish the original positive psychology from
the newer one is to refer to the former as humanistic positive psychology
and to the latter as positivistic positive psychology (Mruk, 2008).
In the same article Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi took great pains to
separate the two positive psychologies in order to, among other t hings,
avoid the type of problems associated with humanistic psychology, such as
its commonly perceived lack of empirical rigor, in order to create more “sci-
entific” foundations for their vision of positive psychology. It can be well
argued that this type of work was necessary at the time for one reason or
another, but it also created certain problems, two of which are important
here. One is an artificial birth date for the concept of positive psychology
that excluded earlier work on very important topics highly germane to the
emerging field.
To make the point even more strongly, it can also be said that much of
this work is characterized by just the type of methodological rigor advo-
cated by the new positive psychology. For example, Fredrickson’s laboratory-
based work on positive emotions (2002) predates this semiofficial birthday
of positive psychology and so does Ryff and Singer’s (2002) well-k nown
material concerning the psychology of well-being, both of which are clearly
positive in nature. Although one may think this historical context is well
past us, t here is clear indication that some positive psychologists still take
a more purist position concerning positive psychology, especially among
what I call “first-generation” positive psychologists such as, perhaps, Water-
man (Churchill & Mruk, 2014; Mruk, 2008).
The other major problem that occurred with rejecting humanistic psy
chology so strongly is that some of its core concepts were ignored, includ-
ing t hose that involved more empirical research, such as often is the case
with work on self-esteem. This development turned out to be very unfortu-
nate in two ways. First, until recently, the newer form of positive psychology
has not made much of nearly a c entury’s worth of work on self-esteem.
Second and even more important for our purposes, an entire body of mate-
rial on how self-esteem works in healthy relationships has not been incor-
porated into positive psychology even at a time when it calls for just this
type of research (Mruk, 2013b). That material, it must be pointed out, does
not include how more problematic forms of self-esteem, such as low or
defensive self-esteem, limits, impairs, or even damages relationships. Rather,
much of this work is often concerned with healthy relationships and how
self-esteem works in such a context.
As we will see, however, a greater appreciation for the field of self-esteem
shows that it has many important positive findings to offer concerning well-
being, so many in fact that leaving them out of a discussion on personal
happiness or interpersonal well-being severely limits any psychology that
wishes to understand such things. Unfortunately, instead of embracing these
important insights, some first-generation positive psychologists went so far
as to dismiss self-esteem as a mere result of other processes (Seligman &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) or as only a social artifact limited to Western cul-
tures (Hewitt, 2002). Such conclusions, however, are suspect given the grow-
ing body of international literature on self-esteem and culture.
For example, that work is markedly characterized by two strong, well-
supported though opposing bodies of work on this topic. One school does
favor such a relativistic position concerning the importance of self-esteem
in relation to well-being (Heine, Lehman, Markus, & Kitayama, 1999). How-
ever, the other makes a very dynamic and equally empirical argument that
strongly supports a more universal view (Yamaguchi, Lin, Morio, & Oku-
mura, 2008). To dismiss self-esteem altogether, or to present this topic in
only one way, not only distorts the facts but also cuts positive psychology
off from exploring important material, to say the least.
At this point, I will restrict the use of the term positive psychology to the
post-2000 definition although as indicated earlier, it is still more accurate
to describe this approach as positivistic positive psychology due to its phil-
osophical foundations. In any case, it is fortunate that positive psychology
continues to evolve, a phenomenon that reflects its vitality as well as poten-
tial. For instance, what I refer to as “second-generation” positive psycholo-
gists (Mruk, 2008) took issue with defining positive psychology in a narrow
fashion in order to go beyond the problems created by a more limited view.
Indeed, even Seligman revised his definition to see positive psychology as
a “mosaic” or collection of work all of which focuses on positive phenom-
ena in general to accommodate findings on well-being that precede the
“official” birth date mentioned above (Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson,
2005).
Further, some positive clinicians embrace certain fundamental human-
istic concepts or findings that are “friendly” to the goals of this broader
approach to positive psychology (Linley & Joseph, 2004). Finally, other
second-generation positive psychologists now include the topic of self-
esteem in basic textbooks on positive psychology (Baumgardner & Crothers,
2009; Carr, 2011) as do authors of newer upper-level books on it (Hojjat &
Crammer, 2013). T oday, even explicitly positive contemporary publica-
tions, such as the Journal of Positive Psychology, include self-esteem from
time to time when discussing such t hings as happiness (Diener & Diener,
1995) or authenticity (Kernis, 2003), which is another theme that is related
to both the psychology of self-esteem and to positive psychology. These
developments mean that we can now talk about self-esteem as an impor
tant part of positive psychology in general (Mruk, 2013a).
THREE VIEWS OF SELF-ESTEEM

Before we can do that, however, there are two good reasons to examine
the concept of self-esteem itself. The first, of course, is that, just as we saw
with the term positive psychology, definitions matter b ecause they play an
instrumental role in opening up as well as closing off what is seen and what
is not. Second, specifying exactly what one means is even more important
when dealing with a topic like self-esteem because failing to do so has played
a key role in creating some of the major problems that characterize this field
today, at least one of which is considerable b ecause of what Wells and Mar-
well describe as a “definitional maze” (1976).
Virtually everything I have written on self-esteem during the past sev-
eral decades begins by defining it so that p
eople may avoid some confusion.
Readers can turn to that work (Mruk, 2013a) if they wish to explore this
topic in detail. For our purposes, it is only necessary to point out the fact
that social scientists define self-esteem in at least three different ways, two
of which have serious limitations not found in the third. A fter we quickly
move through this material, we can then examine the ways in which self-
esteem has been found to play a role in relationships, especially healthy
ones. That step will allow us to then explore the question of how to use this
information to improve relationships in ways that are consistent with the
theory and practice of positive psychology.
William James offered the first major definition of self-esteem in 1890,
which makes it one of the oldest themes in psychology itself. He viewed
self-esteem as an important psychological variable that is best described
as a dynamic ratio. It involves a relationship between what an individual
aspires toward on one hand and how closely they come to living up to
those standards or goals on the other. As he said, “Self-Esteem = Success/
Pretentions” (James, 1890/1983, p. 296). Consequently, every time we reach
a goal to which we aspire or one that is tied to our identity as a person, we
maintain or increase our self-esteem. Conversely, each time we fail to be
sufficiently competent in these ways, our self-esteem suffers and may even
drop. The gap between our aspirations and the degree to which we actually
live up to them determines whether our self-esteem is high or low, which is
why this way of defining self-esteem is sometimes referred to as the dis-
crepancy approach t oday (Pope, McHale, & Craighead, 1988).
Unfortunately, there are two major problems that stem from basing self-
esteem on this type of success which, of course, depends on an individual’s
skills and abilities or competence. One is that it is possible to be very com-
petent at very negative things, such as bullying, lying, cheating, and much
worse. Fortunately, hardly anyone interested in authentic self-esteem under-
stands these and related behaviors as psychological or interpersonal mani-
festations of genuine self-esteem.
Second, some researchers, such as Crocker and Park (2004), point out
that the other side of success is failure. Connecting failure to self-esteem
creates a very problematic situation. On one hand, it means that the indi-
vidual must focus on being successful, which involves facing challenges. On
the other, facing challenges means success is uncertain because it involves
taking risks and dealing with the possibility of failure, some of which is sure
to occur over time. Thus, in addition to mustering up the psychological
energies necessary to be successful, the individual must also spend resources
on guarding against or dealing with failure. If so, then self-esteem becomes
a double-edged sword that may cut in e ither positive or negative ways per-
sonally or interpersonally. Indeed, Crocker and Park go so far as to suggest
that the cost of self-esteem, when defined this way, make it not worth
pursuing.
The next major definition to arise in the field was offered by Morris
Rosenberg and is based on an individual’s “feelings of worth as a person”
(1965, p. 31). One powerful advantage of defining self-esteem this way is that
feelings and attitudes about something, even oneself, can be easily mea
sured using any number of scaling techniques. Indeed, Rosenberg devel-
oped a 10-question easy-to-use assessment instrument that researchers
quickly took advantage of and applied to many settings. In fact, it has been
said that nearly a quarter of the studies that involve measuring self-esteem
involve using this test or something like it (Tafarodi & Swann, 1995). This
estimate also seems to be consistent with examining the study of self-
esteem in other cultures, including China and Japan (Yamaguchi et al., 2008).
In other words, defining self-esteem as a feeling or attitude concerning one’s
worth, or one’s worthiness as a person, and offering a relatively s imple tool to
measure it is by far the most common way of understanding and research-
ing self-esteem today.
However, such worthiness-based definitions, as I call them, also contain
a fatal flaw. For example, if all a person needs to do in order to have self-
esteem is to feel good as a person, then they do not have to tie such a feeling
or belief to reality. Consequently, we would have to say that any spoiled
child or a narcissist has authentic self-esteem and, again, very few people in
the field would agree with such claims. Even worse, this definition led to all
manner of difficulty b ecause it became very popular in the literature on
child rearing and in the educational setting.
One prime example of the negative consequences of this “feel good”

approach is the so-called California self-esteem movement that occurred
near the turn of this c entury (Mruk, 2013a). In this case, common practices,
such as praising c hildren for trying in school instead of being more con-
cerned with rewarding good performance did increase self-esteem when
defined this way. However, it failed to increase student competence in
mastering subject m atter. A fter all, feeling good about oneself when try-
ing to solve a math problem does not mean that 2 + 2 actually equals 7, even
if one tried hard when getting to such an answer. Unfortunately for the
field, the consequences of defining self-esteem in this way nearly meant its
demise as a scientific concept as many in the media and some social scien-
tists began to engage in what may euphemistically be described as “self-
esteem bashing.”
The third way researchers define self-esteem is often called the two-factor
approach b ecause it is based on a relationship between two components,
namely, competence and worthiness, rather than e ither one alone. This def-
inition is more complex than the others. Consequently, Tafarodi and Swann
(1995), one of the main proponents of this approach, offered an analogy to
clarify its dynamic character by comparing lines to rectangles. Two lines by
themselves do not constitute much of anything. However, when one of them
represents width and the other stands for length, the relationship between
the two creates a new and reasonably unique space with its own character-
istics, namely, that of a rectangle.
Like simple lines, we saw that doing something competently and feeling
worthy about oneself are two separate conditions that can stand alone.
However, when t hese two f actors interact with each other, they create some-
thing new as well, namely, the psychological space called “self-esteem” that
has its own characteristics not completely found in one or the other of its
components. In other words, d oing something competently that is also wor-
thy of a mature and fully functioning human being, such as facing a challenge
of living with dignity or standing up for the “right t hing” under difficult condi-
tions, results in something that is both different and more than competence
or worthiness, namely, authentic self-esteem.
However, only one type of rectangle presents a balanced relationship
between two factors, namely, that of a square. When the two factors are
seen this way, a lack of competence and a lack of worthiness would result
in low self-esteem. Competence without a corresponding degree of worthi-
ness to balance it, or a sense of worthiness as a person without anything to
justify it, would result in unbalanced forms of self-esteem. Since unbalanced
states are also unstable, they create a psychological vulnerability that must
be defended against, something that researchers often call fragile, unstable,
or defensive self-esteem. Finally, only a balanced combination of compe-
tence and worthiness could result in a type that is healthy and relatively
stable, which is what some of us call “authentic” self-esteem (Kernis, 2003;

Mruk, 2013a).
Understanding self-esteem as a balanced relationship between compe-
tence and worthiness instead of either one alone thereby avoids the fatal
flaws found in unidimensional definitions. For instance, being good at bad
things, such as we might see with an antisocial personality, would not reflect
healthy self-esteem according to this definition b ecause worthiness is lack-
ing. Similarly, simply feeling good about oneself, as a spoiled child or nar-
cissist usually does, would not mean such an opinion is warranted if one
does not demonstrate competence when dealing with life’s many challenges,
both interpersonal and otherwise. Finally, it should also be noted that defin-
ing self-esteem this way much more closely resembles John Milton’s origi-
nal use of the term in 1642 (Milton, 1642/1950). Like the o thers, of course,
this approach also brings with it a set of limitations. In this case defining
self-esteem in terms of two f actors instead of one makes researching self-
esteem more complicated. Consequently, work done on self-esteem from
this position is less common.
The fact that the psychology of self-esteem is based on three definitions
certainly makes for confusion among both researchers (Wells & Marwell,
1976) and lay p eople alike. However, understanding the source of the dif-
ficulty is a key step in h
andling it effectively. Even so, b
ecause the research
done from those positions is so extensive, and because Rosenberg’s scale
consists of items that reflect competence as well as worthiness, it is still pos
sible to examine the field for regularities. In other words, we can look to
studies that are based on solid designs (especially those that are replicable),
identify clear trends (results that researchers encounter again and again),
and come to some general agreement (areas where l ittle conflict exists) con-
cerning the way self-esteem functions interpersonally as well as person-
ally. These general “findings” are most likely to be encountered regardless
of definition and, therefore, could be most helpful in regard to understand-
ing how self-esteem functions in relationships. Identifying them may also
lead to suggestions concerning how to use positive psychology to foster
healthier relationships and relational well-being.
SELF-ESTEEM AND RELATIONSHIPS

Fortunately, part of this next step, namely identifying key findings con-
cerning self-esteem in relationships and how they pertain to well-being,
already exists, which allows us to avoid reinventing the wheel. For example,
in previous work on self-esteem and relationships, I describe 10 basic groups
of findings that research in this area consistently supports (Mruk, 2013b).
At least two of them are highly relevant here. One concerns connections
between self-esteem and well-being, both that of the individual and of the
relationship itself. The other pertains to how self-esteem may help generate
positive self-fulfilling relational cycles and what that could mean in terms
of practical applications, both of which should be of interest to positive
psychology.
The first set of possibilities is grounded in the two basic functions
researchers generally attribute to self-esteem, both of which play important
roles in regard to self-regulation. One of them is commonly known as the
“self-protective” function of self-esteem mainly b ecause it is involved in
helping the self to maintain a degree of internal and experiential stability
around which identity may form and persist over time. The other is gener-
ally referred to as the “self-enhancement” or “self-expansion” function of
self-esteem in large part because it is understood to help people perceive
opportunities and then motivate them to take the risks that are necessary
to develop, expand, or grow both personally and interpersonally. The exis-
tence of two somewhat contradictory functions, one seeking stability and
the other risking it in order to reach higher levels of well-being, makes self-
esteem a very dynamic phenomenon, not just a stable trait (Mruk, 2013a).
When seen this way, it is obvious that individual well-being depends on
a balanced interplay of these two functions, with one dominating in a given
moment or situation and then the other emerging in the next, depending
on what threats or opportunities arise. Since self-esteem also affects how
we perceive, react to, and interact with others, these protective and enhanc-
ing functions are very much a part of relationships, particularly in more
important and in more intimate ones. In addition, it must be noted that
relationships are reciprocal processes, which in this case means that the two
functions of self-esteem are influenced by relationships, as well being
affected by them. For example, if a relationship or encounter is relatively
stress-free and healthy, the enhancement function would dispose individ-
uals to move together in more enhancing ways. If stress is high at the time
or if the relationship is poor, we would expect the protective function to be
more active.
On one hand, then, the function of self-esteem in a relational context
is to protect the self from the slings and arrows of life and to preserve the
stability of the relationships connected to one’s sense of identity and well-
being. At the very least, those who lack authentic self-esteem are more
vulnerable to negative personal as well as interpersonal events and possi-
bilities. Since traditional psychology often focuses on these types of issues
and since the study of self-esteem has been around so long, the field has
amassed a large amount of information on the negative dimensions of low
and defensive self-esteem. In fact, the DSM-IV identified some 24 disorders
that involve problems with self-esteem (O’Brien, Bartoletti, & Leitzel, 2006).
Moreover, it is important to note that even the strongest critics of self-

esteem, such as Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, and Vohs (2003), recog-
nize this buffering function and appreciate its value.
Such self- esteem dynamics also affect relationships. For example,
researchers in this area frequently talk about a phenomenon called “rejec-
tion sensitivity” (Downey & Feldman, 1996). This interpersonal self-esteem
issue means that individuals are largely oriented t oward the danger of being
hurt by or of losing important relationships to the extent that they are gener-
ally vigilant to the signs of such possibilities. This sensitivity is problematic
in two ways. First, rejection sensitivity is a very selective form of attention
that focuses on negative possibilities and meanings instead of a bigger or
brighter picture, which means that it often distorts perception as well as
experience. Second, when such individuals perceive a threat, they are quickly
motivated to mobilize their personal and interpersonal defenses in order to
protect themselves in relation to the other which, in turn, closes off impor
tant relational possibilities.
At the concrete level of everyday interpersonal life, t hese behaviors and
patterns occur in many different ways. For instance, they may take the form
of underestimating the degree to which a partner perceives one’s own posi-
tive qualities (Bellavia & Murray, 2003), decreasing awareness of positive
affirmations by one’s partner when they do occur (Marigold, Holmes, &
Ross, 2007), becoming overly sensitive to signs of disapproval, sometimes
even when there is none (Sciangula & Morry, 2009), helping individuals
give in to pressure by others more easily (Gudjonsson, Sigurdsson, Einars-
son, & Einarsson, 2008), experiencing more frequent negative interpersonal
emotions including jealously, using violence in relationships more often
(Downey & Feldman, 1996), and even consuming alcohol more frequently
(Stinson, Logel, Zanna, Holmes, & Cameron, 2008). In short, rejection sensi-
tivity increases the possibility of problematic interpersonal behaviors that
are detrimental to the other and to the relationship itself. They include deny-
ing or avoiding relational problems, blaming the other for relational difficul-
ties instead of owning one’s role in them, and being less able to tolerate the
vulnerability often necessary to work through interpersonal issues, to name
a few (Downy & Feldman, 1996).
Conversely, and of more interest to positive psychology given its focus
on possibility rather than negativity, higher self-esteem is associated with
the buffering effect by making it stronger. This dimension of healthy self-
esteem, in turn, increases the ability to tolerate ordinary relational strain
better and decreases the likelihood of the aforementioned behavior. Con-
sequently, it is not surprising that researchers often note a positive correla-
tion between self-esteem and well-being. For instance, there appears to be
a strong connection between self-esteem and happiness in marriage that
various positive psychologists and o thers have recognized for some time,
and satisfying relationships are known to increase well-being (Diener &
Diener, 1995; Sciangula & Morry, 2009).
Fortunately, research also reveals some of the mechanisms involved in
these positive findings. For instance, people with higher self-esteem often
use what are called “rejection prevention strategies” in relationships instead
of taking a more defensive self-protective position in them, even during dif-
ficult times (Berenson & Downey, 2006). In this case, the increased ability
to tolerate stress associated with the buffering function helps an individ-
ual move t oward a relationship rather than away from it or against it. One
consequence of this condition is that t hose with authentic self-esteem are
more likely to engage in behaviors that are helpful to nurturing or repairing
relationships when necessary. They include such t hings as admitting guilt,
accepting responsibility when appropriate, offering a sincere apology when
needed, prioritizing the needs of the other when it is helpful to do so, and so
on, all of which foster interpersonal or relational well-being.
On the other hand, the expansion function of self-esteem is also very
important to relational well-being in ways that should be of even more
interest to positive psychology. For example, when a person expands one’s
sense of self or identity in relation to another, the reciprocal character of a
relationship often allows it to grow as well. This type of interpersonal expan-
sion often fosters the growth of the relationship by enhancing its possibili-
ties or deepening them in ways that increase our sense of connection,
purpose, competence, and worth, or well-being (Aron, Ketay, Riela, & Aron,
2008). In other words, just as the process of self-actualization requires the
individual to move beyond current emotional, cognitive, and behavioral
comfort zones in order to reach new and more fulfilling possibilities, so
does the fulfillment of relational possibilities, all the way from friendship
to love (Mruk, 2013b). In short, w hether set in a personal or interpersonal
context, both functions of self-esteem are necessary to reach well-being as
well as to maintain it, because they work together through a complex cho-
reography of comfort, risk taking, and movement over time.
More concretely, for instance, healthy self-esteem has been found to be
associated with important relationship-enhancing behaviors, such as the
willingness to initiate relationships in the first place that involves taking
risks with rejection and the ability to engage in self-disclosure, something
that means tolerating being vulnerable to the other (Buhrmester, Furman,
Wittenberg, & Reis 1988). In addition, the degree to which one sees one’s
partner in a positive light appears to be associated with higher self-esteem
(Sciangula & Morry, 2009). This f actor is very active during the initial stages
of a relationship, such as the so-called honeymoon phase, and may later
play an important role during difficult relational periods a fter reality sets
in by reminding partners that the relationship has value. Similarly, the
tendency to engage in playful behavior with the other, something that often
increases many other positive emotions, including interpersonal spontane-
ity and flow, is associated with healthy self-esteem (Aune & Wong, 2002).
Indeed, even sexual intimacy, which can greatly expand and deepen rela-
tionships, appears to involve self-esteem in this way (Menard & Hoffman,
2009). To say it most succinctly, the self-protective and self-enhancing
functions of self-esteem work together in ways that affect personal, inter-
personal, and relational well-being, all of which are of interest to positive
psychology.
SELF-ESTEEM, POSITIVE THERAPY, AND RELATIONSHIPS:

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
As expressed above, the literature on self-esteem and relationships sup-
ports the position that healthy self-esteem plays a role in fostering positive
relational events or processes and vice versa. However, the practical impli-
cations of these findings have not yet made much headway into the work
positive psychologists do concerning relational well-being. Fortunately, the
second set of findings concerning self-esteem and relationships may be use-
ful in this regard and for helping positive psychology to make more head-
way into one of its major goals.
They center on the phenomenon of emotional cycles, which have been
of interest to positive psychologists for some time. Much of the work on self-
esteem and relational cycles is based on research showing that low self-
esteem often leads to lower degrees of relational satisfaction for parties
over time. In other words, whether consciously or not, many people with
low self-esteem act in ways that are problematic for themselves, for the
other in their relationships, and, ultimately, for the relationship itself. The
most common way of describing this dimension of self-esteem and how it
functions in relationships is that of a self-fulfilling prophecy (Baldwin, 2006;
Berenson & Downey, 2006; Leary, 2008; Murray, 2008).
Positive psychologists are more familiar than most with the reciprocal
and dynamic processes of self-f ulfilling cycles through their work on emo-
tions and how they influence well-being or the lack of it. Indeed, one of the
richest and most useful bodies of work in positive psychology to date con-
cerns the identification and understanding of emotional cycles. For exam-
ple, Fredrickson’s (2013) work on positive emotions played a key role in
legitimizing the study of positive emotions even in general psychology in
spite of its greater concern with negative ones such as anxiety, depression,
aggression, and the like.
Three dimensions of her research are relevant for our more relational
focus. First, the “broaden” part of her well-known broaden and build theory
of emotion (2002) revealed and substantiated the evolutionary value of

positive emotions. She found, for instance, that positive emotions tend to
expand awareness and increase the perception of new possibilities, some-
thing that has value because it paves the way for f uture adaptive responses
and initiatives. Negative emotions, by contrast, narrow perception and
restrict possibilities to those that are more immediately available. Second,
positive emotions seem to have some ability to offset negative ones and
stress in general through what she described as an “undoing effect.”
Although the concept of a “positivity ratio” was premature to say the least
(Brown, Sokal, & Freidman, 2013), it is clear that positive emotions have
value. Not only do they feel good, which by itself is not unimportant per-
sonally and interpersonally, but they also seem to be connected to another
beneficial process, namely, resilience or the highly valued ability to “bounce
back.”
Finally, the “build” portion of the theory may be even more important
for our work. Fredrickson went on to find that just as negative affect may
lead to downward emotional and behavioral cycles such as those seen in
depression or anxiety, positive emotions can contribute to upward cycles,
ones that increase well-being. Like self-esteem, both sets of dynamics work
on the basis of vicious and virtuous self-fulfilling dynamics, respectively.
Research done by positive psychologists in related areas, such as those
involving the study of gratitude, savoring, and so on, support this way of
understanding and appreciating positive emotions (Baumgardner & Crothers,
2009).
No m atter how it is defined, self-esteem involves an affective component.
It may take the form of feeling a sense of accomplishment associated with
competently facing a challenge or reaching an important goal. Such a posi-
tive emotion may also occur in relation to the other major component of
self-esteem as well. For example, the same research finds that being valued
by a significant other or establishing a new relationship with someone gen-
erates feelings of being valued or being a person of some worth to another
(Epstein, 1980). Both types of “self-esteem moments,” as I call them (Mruk,
2013a), are positive experiences that generate positive emotions. A fter all,
they feel good, expand awareness, and create more possibilities, just like pos-
itive emotions do in general. Since positive psychology advocates studying
positive experiences rather than negative ones, it stands to reason that posi-
tive psychologists should welcome the study of such self-esteem moments.
Further, other research indicates that the most valuable self-esteem
moments as defined by the two-factor approach are not simple “feel-good”
experiences that are commonly associated with self-esteem t oday. Instead,
they involve successfully facing personal or interpersonal challenges,
which requires overcoming fear, taking risks, and mustering the courage
necessary to act with dignity u nder difficult conditions. D
oing the “right
t hing” when it would be far easier to turn away from it is one example of
such a positive self-esteem moment because doing so simultaneously dem-
onstrates one’s competence and worthiness as a person (Jackson, 1984). In
addition, it has also been shown that all three types of self-esteem moments,
but especially the latter, can increase self-esteem in the way that self-
fulfilling cycles describe (Mruk, 2013a). Consequently, if it is true that some
self-esteem moments are positive experiences and if it is true that positive
emotions can create upward cycles, then systematically increasing the fre-
quency of positive self-esteem experiences should be a path to increasing
self-esteem and well-being, perhaps even relational well-being, over time.
One self-esteem enhancement program called Competence and Worthi-
ness Training or CWT (Mruk, 2013a) does just that. This five-step struc-
tured approach is designed to increase the frequency of all three positive
self-esteem moments in large, but mostly in small, ways. The latter are espe-
cially useful because they are far more readily available to people and
because they may be strung together to create a cumulative effect that grad-
ually but steadily shifts self-esteem in a healthy direction over time. In
addition, CWT has been found to be an effective program based on pre-and
posttesting research (Hakim-Larson & Mruk, 1997; O’Brien, Bartoletti, &
Leitzel, 2006).
The first of the steps, which are presented in a highly detailed if not man-
ualized fashion elsewhere (Mruk, 2013a), focuses on helping the individual
understand self-esteem in terms of competence and worthiness instead of
one component or the other. The next is to assist participants in identify-
ing their own strengths and weaknesses in these areas, especially how they
affect domains of life that pertain to their individual identities, including
interpersonal domains. The third one is to increase a sense of worth through
basic cognitive restructuring techniques, and the fourth is to do the same
for competence by increasing problem-solving abilities. The fifth and final
step is to develop a self-directed individualized self-esteem enhancement
program designed to foster a positive cycle of increasing competence, wor-
thiness, or both, in domains of life that are meaningful in terms of a per-
son’s sense of self and identity. At no time does the program focus on
negative self-esteem moments, failures, rejections, and the like.
More clinically minded readers familiar with positive psychology might
also identify CWT as a positive therapy according to the three criteria
offered by Seligman, Steen, Park, and Peterson (2005). For example, the pro-
gram focuses primarily on positive emotions and behavior rather than on
negative ones. Second, CWT is offered in a highly structured, time-limited
fashion, which is a format that makes it more reliable and researchable than
open-ended approaches. Finally, the program is evidence-based as indicated
by published work based on standard pre-and posttesting evaluations of
efficacy as mentioned above. In addition, CWT may be offered in a group
therapy format for clinical populations or as a psychoeducational program

for nonclinical ones.
If problematic and high self-esteem affect relationships in negative and
positive ways, respectively, and we have seen that they do, then increasing
self-esteem ought to benefit relationships as well. To date I do not know of
any self-esteem enhancement program, including CWT, that directly
addresses self-esteem in relationships or what might be called “relational
self-esteem.” However, CWT’s basic design is such that it could be modi-
fied for interpersonal work based on two key principles. One is that since
relationships are reciprocal in nature, increasing one partner’s healthy self-
esteem is likely to affect the other’s self-esteem, even if it is “only” to reduce
defensiveness or to encourage the type of risk taking necessary to make
relationships grow. Second, if positive upward cycles of healthy self-esteem
moments can increase individual well-being, then it may be possible to
modify the program to increase interpersonal self-esteem moments in ways
that could facilitate an upward relational cycle, so to speak.
For example, step 1 would aim at understanding the nature and value of
self-esteem moments, but be modified to focus more directly on t hose that
involve or affect another person, such as being accepted, acting with virtue
toward the other, or working to face a relational challenge together. Simi-
larly, the second step could be used to assess self-esteem strengths of each
partner to identify areas in which they could help the other increase com-
petence, worthiness, or both. For instance, such relational opportunities
might also include being kind, expressing gratitude or appreciation for the
other more often, and so on.
Step 3 would still focus on cognitions, but could involve such activities
as strengthening positive perceptions, including so-called positive illusions,
and offering positive feedback concerning the other when it is warranted,
something that might also act as a reinforcing mechanism. The next step
might be modified to focus on increasing interpersonal competencies by
improving communication and conflict resolution skills so as to resolve
interpersonal challenges in a more positive fashion. Finally, the last part of
the program, namely, creating a self-esteem action project, could be more
interpersonal in nature. For instance, partners could focus on finding more
ways to share positive time together in mutual flow activities and other sat-
isfying interpersonal interactions (Mruk, in press).
Of course, therapists who are experienced with c ouples or with family
work might have other well-supported techniques to offer at each step of the
way. As long as t hese suggestions are placed in the appropriate step of iden-
tifying, assessing, increasing worth, increasing competence, or developing a
mutual plan, such familiarity with relational work could help design a more
effective interpersonal form of CWT. For the reasons stated throughout
t hese pages concerning the connections between self-esteem, relationships,

and satisfaction, such a program could increase personal as well as rela-
tional well-being in a synergistic, self-fulfilling fashion. The structured and
time-limited nature of this program also means that the efficacy of such
modifications could readily be studied, for instance, by doing pre-and post-
testing study with any number of relationship or life satisfaction instru-
ments. Finally, positive results would offer positive psychology another
therapeutic possibility for their arsenal of ways to help o thers, this time by
generating positive interpersonal relationships, techniques for which are
sorely lacking today.
CONCLUSION
This chapter began by briefly comparing the original humanistic vision of
positive psychology with the more empirically oriented contemporary view
presented by Seligman and others at the turn of the century. After reviewing
historical similarities and differences, I went on to consider how research
on self-esteem, which has long been a part of humanistic as well as tradi-
tional psychology, could make pertinent contributions to a positive psychol
ogy of interpersonal relationships. This work concluded by showing how
advances in the psychology of self-esteem could become the basis for a pos-
itive interpersonal therapy, thereby contributing to positive psychology’s
third major goal of increasing various forms of interpersonal well-being.
REFERENCES
Aron, A., Ketay, S., Riela, S., & Aron, E. (2008). How close o thers construct and
reconstruct who we are and how we feel about ourselves. In J. Wood,
A. Tesser, & J. Holmes (Eds.), The self and social relationships (pp. 209–229).
New York: Psychology Press.
Aune, K. S., & Wong, N. C. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of adult play in
romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 9(3), 279–286.
Baldwin, M. (2006). Self-esteem and close relationship dynamics. In M. Kernis
(Ed.), Self-esteem issues and answers: A sourcebook of current perspectives
(pp. 359–366). New York: Psychology Press.
Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high
self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or
healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4, 1–44.
Baumgardner, S. R., & Crothers, M. K. (2009). Positive psychology. Upper S addle
River, NJ: Pearson.
Bellavia, G., & Murray, S. (2003). Did I do that? Self-esteem-related differences in
reactions to romantic partners’ moods. Personal Relationships, 10(1), 77–95.
Berenson, K., & Downey, G. (2006). Self-esteem and rejection sensitivity in close
relationships. In M. Kernis (Ed.), Self-esteem issues and answers: A source
book of current perspectives. New York: Psychology Press.
Brown, N. L., Sokal, A. D., & Friedman, H. L. (2013). The complex dynamics of
wishful thinking: The critical positivity ratio. American Psychologist, 68(9),
801–813.
Buhrmester, D., Furman, W., Wittenberg, M., & Reis, H. (1988). Five domains of
interpersonal competence in peer relationships. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 55, 991–1008.
Carr, A. (2011). Positive psychology: The science of happiness and h uman strengths
(2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Churchill, S. D., & Mruk, C. (2014). Practicing what we preach in humanistic and
positive psychology. American Psychologist, 69, 90–92.
Compton, W. C. (2005). Introduction to positive psychology. Belmont, CA: Thomson/
Wadsworth.
Crocker, J., & Park, L. E. (2004). The costly pursuit of self-esteem. Psychological Bul-
letin, 130(3), 392–414.
Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and
self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 653–663.
Downey, G., & Feldman, S. (1996). Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate
relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1327–1343.
Duckworth, A. L., Steen, T. A., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Positive psychology in
clinical practice. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1, 629–651.
Emmons, R. A., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Counting blessings versus burdens:
An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in
daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 377–389.
Epstein, S. (1980). The self-concept: A review and the proposal of an integrated the-
ory of personality. In E. Straub (Ed.), Personality: Basic aspects and current
research (pp. 83–131). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2002). Positive emotions. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.),
Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 120–134). New York: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2013). Positive emotions broaden and build. In P. Devine &
A. Plant (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 1–53). Bur-
lington, MA: Academic Press.
Gudjonsson, G. H., Sigurdsson, J. F., Einarsson, E., & Einarsson, J. H. (2008). Per-
sonal versus impersonal relationship compliance and their relationship with
personality. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 19(4), 502–516.
Hakim-Larson, J., & Mruk, C. (1997). Enhancing self-esteem in a community
mental health setting. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 67, 655–659.
Heine, S. J., Lehman, D. R., Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1999). Is t here a univer-
sal need for self-esteem? Psychological Review, 106(4), 766–794.
Hewitt, J. P. (2002). The social construction of self-esteem. In C. R. Snyder & S. J.
Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 135–158). Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.
Hojjat, M., & Cramer, D. (Eds.). (2013). Positive psychology of love (pp. 149–161).
Jackson, M. (1984). Self-esteem and meaning: A life historical investigation. Albany,

NY: State University of New York.
James, W. (1983). The principles of psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univer-
sity Press. (Original work published 1890)
Kernis, M. H. (2003). Optimal self-esteem and authenticity: Separating fantasy
from reality. Psychological Inquiry, 14(1), 83–89.
Leary, M. (2008). Functions of the self in interpersonal relationships: What does
the self actually do? In J. Wood, A. Tesser, & J. Holmes (Eds.), The self and
social relationships (pp. 95–115). New York: Psychology Press.
Linley, P. A., & Joseph, S. (2004). Positive psychology in practice. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley.
Marigold, D. C., Holmes, J. G., & Ross, M. (2007). More than words: Reframing
compliments from romantic partners fosters security in low self-esteem
individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(2), 232–248.
Maslow, A. H. (1964). Religions, values, and peak-e xperiences. New York: Viking.
Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row. (Orig-
inal work published 1954)
Menard, A., & Hoffman, A. (2009). The interrelationships between sexual self-
esteem, sexual assertiveness and sexual satisfaction. Canadian Journal of
Human Sexuality, 18(1), 35.
Milton, J. (1950). Apology against a pamphlet. In C. Brooks (Ed.), Complete poetry
and selected prose of John Milton. New York: Modern Library. (Original
work published 1642)
Mruk, C. (in press). Feeling good by doing good: A guide to authentic self-e steem
and well-being. New York.
Mruk, C. (2008). The psychology of self-esteem: A potential common ground for
humanistic positive psychology and positivistic positive psychology. The
Humanistic Psychologist, 36, 143–158.
Mruk, C. (2013a). Self-esteem and positive psychology: Research, theory, and prac-
tice (4th ed). New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Mruk, C. (2013b). Self-esteem, relationships, and positive psychology: Concepts,
research, and connections. In M. Hojjat & D. Cramer (Eds.), Positive psy
chology of love (pp. 149–161). New York: Oxford University Press.
Murray, S. (2008). Risk regulation in relationships: Self-esteem and the if-then con-
tingencies of interdependent life. In J. Wood, A. Tesser, & J. Holmes (Eds.),
The self and social relationships (pp. 3–25). New York: Psychology Press.
O’Brien, E. J., Bartoletti, M., & Leitzel, J. D. (2006). Self-esteem, psychopathology
and psychotherapy. In M. Kernis (Ed.), Self-e steem issues and answers:
A source book of current perspectives. New York: Psychology Press.
Pope, A., McHale, S., & Craighead, E. (1988). Self-esteem enhancement with children
and adolescents. New York: Pergamon Press.
Pressman, S. D., Kraft, T. L., & Cross, M. P. (2014). It’s good to do good and receive
good: The impact of a ‘pay it forward’ style kindness intervention on giver
and receiver well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(4), 293–302.
doi:1080/17439760.2014.965269
Rodewalt, F., & Tragakis, M. W. (2003). Self-esteem and self-regulation: T oward
optimal studies of self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 14(1), 66–70.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Prince
ton University Press.
Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (2002). From social structure to biology: Integrative sci-
ence in pursuit of human and well-being. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.),
Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 541–555). New York: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Sciangula, A., & Morry, M. M. (2009). Self-esteem and perceived regard: How I see
myself affects my relationship satisfaction. Journal of Social Psychology,
149(2), 143–158.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An intro-
duction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Peterson, C. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A
handbook and classification. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychol
ogy progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist,
5, 410–421.
Stinson, D. A., Logel, C., Zanna, M. P., Holmes, J. G., & Cameron, J. J. (2008). The
cost of lower self-esteem: Testing a self-and social-bonds model of health.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(3), 412–428.
Tafarodi, R. W., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (1995). Self-liking and self-competence as
dimensions of global self-esteem: Initial validation of a measure. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 65(2), 322–342.
Wells, E. L., & Marwell, G. (1976). Self-esteem: Its conceptualization and measure
ment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Yamaguchi, S., Lin, C., Morio, H., & Okumura, T. (2008). Motivated expression of
self-esteem across cultures. In R. Sorrentino & S. Yamaguchi (Eds.), Hand-
book of motivation and cognition across cultures. San Diego: Academic
Press.
4
The Positive Psychology
of Romantic Love
Bianca P. Acevedo
INTRODUCTION
Love is a force like no other that inspires us to sing, dance, sacrifice, and
sometimes to accomplish t hings we never thought possible. Through the
ages, love (and perhaps even obsession) has been found in people of all ages,
in nearly all cultures around the globe (Jankowiak & Fischer, 1992; Tennov,
1979), and its evidence may be seen in the work of artists, poets, scientists,
thinkers, religious figures, and even world leaders. Broadly, love may be
thought of as a “spark” in us, that when not commingled with obsession,
most certainly moves us to think and behave in ways that are aligned with
our highest selves. The late Caryl Rusbult’s research on the “Michaelangelo
Phenomenon” was based on the idea that lovers may invisibly sculpt each
other t oward their “ideal” selves—which can be thought of as the aspects
of the self that one aspires to be or accomplish, such as a g reat photogra-
pher, writer, parent, or spouse. This line of work has shown that couples that
help each other to reach their ideal selves, benefit both individually and as
a couple (Drigotas, Rusbult, Wieselquist, & Whitton, 1999).
In recent times, technological studies involving neuroimaging and
genetics have helped advance an understanding of the biological basis of
romantic love, motherly love, love between friends, and even compassion
55
and empathy. However, this tradition does not tell the complete story of love
because romantic love is experiential and multifaceted—it is physical, psy-
chological, and spiritual, and when it makes a grand appearance in our lives,
it is usually a blessing and a miracle. That is not to say that we d on’t have
some hand in making love happen. Certainly, we must be open to it, show up
with enthusiasm, and nurture it with vigilance. Therefore, a strong positive
mindset is essential for creating and maintaining romantic love in close
relationships as it involves valuing the beloved (Kolodny, 2003; Rousar, 1990)
and thinking of them often and in positive ways (O’Leary, Acevedo, Aron,
Huddy, & Mashek, 2011). In turn, positive, loving relationships facilitate
well-being including life satisfaction, high self-esteem, and strong immunity
(e.g., Kiecolt-Glaser, Glaser, Cacioppo, & Malarkey, 1998; Proulx, Helms, &
Buehler, 2007; Riehl-Emde, Thomas, & Willi, 2003). As romantic love is a
key factor in positive psychology and lasting, fulfilling marriages, this chap-
ter will focus on various theoretical perspectives on romantic love from
ancient to modern times including related research and cutting-edge brain
and genetics studies on the basis of romantic love and pair-bonding.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF VIEWS ON ROMANTIC LOVE

It’s ironic to note that although this chapter focuses on the positive psy
chology of romantic love, some of the earlier thinking about romantic love
reflected a range of views, from its dark side to its euphoric, spiritual con-
nection with the Divine. One key example of this variation is reflected in
Plato’s “Symposium”—one of the earliest scholarly writings in the West on
romantic love. In “The Symposium” romantic love is defined as “all t hings
beautiful,” “a pauper always in need,” and even as “a dark tempest.” Some-
what similarly, although the Bible’s messages about love are vast, romantic
coupling is not always depicted positively. More specifically, the story of
Adam and Eve depicts the first human couple as being shunned from heaven
for eating forbidden fruit, therefore relegating all of humanity to sin, suf-
fering, and life on Earth.
In contrast to the somewhat negative views of couplehood, many ancient
Eastern scriptures depict love as a spiritual connection to the Divine. For
example, the Bhagavad Gita—a sacred Hindu text that is believed to have
appeared around 500 to 200 CE—describes love as “a divine force that show-
ers humanity with the wonders and beauty of the universe.” This can be
summed up in one verse, “You are so much loved by me!” (BG18.64), refer-
ring to God’s love for humanity or perhaps also how lovers feel about one
another. Another ancient Hindu text, “The Vedas” (which are thought to
be the oldest sacred texts in the world), describes love as the “expansion of
human consciousness” that may be achieved through greater intelligence,
power, and creativity, with the ultimate aim being to serve h
uman evolution.
In earlier times, many cultures tended to view falling in love before

marriage as a threat to the social order, b ecause marriages w
ere usually
arranged for the exchange of money, land, and power. Also, in societies with
a strong religious influence, it was thought that love ought to be reserved
for God and minimized among couples (Coontz, 2006). Perhaps these
beliefs w ere instilled to have some form of control over love, which could
pose a threat to the social order if gone unchecked. Around the 12th century,
there was a shift in social norms to “courtly love” characterized by roman-
tic ideals such as knights in shining armor saving and adoring “a lovely lady.”
Ironically, “the lovely lady” was not typically the knight’s wife; therefore,
although t hese were times of romantic love ideals, they still remained sep-
arate from marriage.
Around the 1900s, what we tend to think of as “romanticism” emerged
with equality, common interests, sexual attraction, and complementarity
in relationships. This was the start of the “relationship/sexual” revolution,
which really got ignited in the 1960s with a rise in egalitarian values as more
women entered the workforce. Th ese changes allowed modern romance to
flourish with ideals of equality, self-fulfillment, common interests, support,
and growth (Dion & Dion, 1991). C ouples no longer had to be together but
rather chose to be together and married for love. Therefore, romantic love
has been the major driving force for many modern marriages. In modern
times, c ouples not only marry for love, but many view its disappearance as
grounds for divorce (Simpson, Campbell, & Berscheid, 1986). However, this
may seem like a catch-22 b ecause it is common belief that romantic love
must fade over time. Yet, romantic love is commonly viewed as a strong pre-
dictor of a couple’s relationship quality as it is associated with relation-
ship happiness, affection, positive views of a partner, and an active sex life
(Masuda, 2003; O’Leary et al., 2011). On the flip side, decreases in roman-
tic love are often associated with diminished affection, lower relationship
satisfaction, a greater likelihood of attraction t oward alternative partners,
and infidelity (Huston, Houts, Caughlin, Smith, & George, 2001; Maner,
2009). How have researchers accounted for the changes in romantic love
over time? In the following section, I describe scholarly views on the nature
and trajectory of romantic love in relationships.
THEORIES ON THE NATURE AND TRAJECTORY

OF ROMANTIC LOVE
In the early days of close relationship research, theorists explained rela-
tionship maintenance processes by suggesting that in general, romantic/
passionate love—commonly defined as “a state of intense longing for u nion
with another” (Hatfield & Sprecher, 1986)—inevitably evolves into “com-
panionate love,” defined as “the affection and tenderness we feel for t hose
with whom our lives are deeply entwined” that involves sharing of interests,
intimacy, and warmth, but is generally devoid of strong attraction or sexual
desire (Berscheid & Hatfield, 1969; Grote & Frieze, 1994). A similar typology
was proposed by love styles theory, which termed it Storge—or a secure,
trusting, friendship-type love that does not involve sexual desire and is
often experienced t oward siblings or friends (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1992).
Passionate love is also referred to as “being in love” (Myers & Berscheid,
1997) or “infatuation” (Fisher, 1998). This and a similar understanding for
the terms limerence (Tennov, 1979) and mania (Lee, 1977) include an obses-
sive element, with intrusive thinking, uncertainty, and mood swings. The
widely used Passionate Love Scale (Hatfield & Sprecher, 1986) contains a few
obsessive-t ype items, such as “Sometimes I feel I c an’t control my thoughts;
they are obsessively on my partner.” Characterized with this obsessive ele
ment, it is not surprising that many research studies and theories have sug-
gested that romantic love must fade over time in relationships. Indeed, some
early psychologists even suggested that the presence of romantic love in
long-term relationships might be an indication of overidealization or pathol-
ogy (e.g., Freud, 1921; Fromm, 1956). And in some sense this may even be a
rational strategy for maintaining the status quo and avoiding the threat of
love existing at high levels in marriages, as couples appear to benefit from
downward social comparison with other c ouples (Rusbult et al., 2000).
However, while romantic love may fade over time, theorists have pro-
posed that there may be mechanisms through which it may be sustained
or increased at any relationship stage. For example, Berscheid’s (1983)
“interruption theory of emotion” proposes that temporary interruptions in
relationships, such as brief separations and conflicts, may reignite passion
once the conflict or separation is resolved.
Baumeister and Bratslavsky (1999) proposed that passion is a function of
the rate of change in intimacy over time, such that when intimacy increases
rapidly, passion will be high. In contrast, if intimacy is not increasing (such as
when couples reach a point at which they understand and know much about
one another), then passion w ill drop to zero, even if intimacy remains at a
high level. Thus, c ouples may continue to sustain or even increase levels of
passion by continuing to promote increases in intimacy.
Somewhat similarly, Aron and Aron (1986) in the “self-expansion model
of close relationships” proposed that passionate love stems from the intense
rapid self-expansion that occurs as individuals come to include aspects
of the beloved partner in the self. They termed this idea, which has been
extended to other relationships and applied in hundreds of studies, “inclu-
sion of other in the self.” One implication of this model is that as partners
come to know each other well, the rate of expansion slows down. However, it
is possible that through continued expansion with one’s partner, romantic
love may be sustained or even grown. This idea has been tested in several
laboratory and self-report studies. For example, a series of studies showed

that through engagement in novel and challenging (but not overly stressful)
activities together, couples experienced significant increases in passionate
love, relationship excitement, relationship satisfaction, and positive affect
(Aron, Norman, Aron, Mckenna, & Heyman, 2000; Coulter & Malouff,
2013; Reissman, Aron, & Bergen, 1993). Other studies have shown that self-
expansion is associated with how frequently c ouples engage in affection,
sharing of problems, and trying to help one another using humor and play;
enhanced positive affect, admiration, and adoration for a partner, and also
perceiving a partner as rewarding (for review see Acevedo, Aron, Xu, &
Lewandowski, 2017).
Taking a biological/evolutionary approach, some researchers have
focused on love’s role in the perpetuation of the species, suggesting that love
evolved to promote pair-bonding and increase the chances of offspring
survival (Buss, 1989; Fisher, 1998). For example, Buss (2006) proposed
that romantic love (1) is universal (and not limited to Western cultures);
(2) emerges in the context of long-term mating (and is rare in short-term
mating); and that it (3) functions to signal long-term commitment to a
partner, ensuring that an individual will stay with a partner through time
and not just abandon ship when problems or other desirable partners arise.
Biological anthropologist Helen Fisher (1998) proposed that a differen-
tiated three-part brain system evolved for mating (the sex drive), courtship
(passionate/romantic love), and parenting (attachment). With regard to
long-term passionate love, Fisher (2006) proposed that it generally fades
over time, being metabolically taxing, particularly to individuals that must
redirect energy to rear c hildren. However, she suggested that some c ouples
do sustain romantic love in long-term relationships, as its function is to
keep the body toned and the mind alert, as well as providing c ouples with
companionship, optimism, and energy into old age.
TOWARD A POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY OF ROMANTIC LOVE

Collectively, some theories and research (including a meta-analysis of
25 studies) suggest that romantic love may exist at high levels in long-term
marriages and is not doomed to fade over time. One possibility for the widely
held assumption that romantic love declines inevitably in long-term rela-
tionships is the commingling of romantic love and infatuation (Acevedo &
Aron, 2009). Romantic love, as delineated by love styles theory, has clearly
distinguished between romantic love without obsession (Eros) and Mania
(infatuation/obsession). This thinking dates back thousands of years to
ancient Greeks, who distinguished between romantic love (a combination
of Eros and sexual passion) and other types of love, such as Agape (a selfless
concern for o
thers), Philia (friendship, we-ness, feelings of kinship), and
Mania. Recently, Walsh (1991) delineated the relationship between
romantic love (Eros) and Agape stating that:
Agape, the generous and unselfish giving of oneself is a noble ideal, but it
must be augmented by Eros if it is to stand any hope of being realized. In the
sacred sense, Agape is the love that God pours down on humanity, while Eros
is the vehicle through which humanity ascends to God. In the secular sense,
Agape creates value in the object loved by bestowing love on it. In the act of
creating value in the beloved we simultaneously create more joy for ourselves
(Eros), and in the act of creating joy for ourselves we create joy for the loved
one. The merging of Eros and Agape is the essence of ethical goodness. Few
of us ever achieve such a lofty goal, yet no nobler goal has ever been set. Love
is goodness, and goodness is love; through it and by it we achieve complete-
ness and unity with the universe outside of ourselves. (p. 30)
Adopting t hese views of romantic love does not constrain it to a finite
amount of time in a relationship. Research supports the notion that roman-
tic love may exist at high levels among individuals in the l ater stages of rela-
tionships and life (Hatfield, Traupmann, & Sprecher, 1984; Tennov, 1979)
with some studies showing no significant differences in romantic love across
life stages, from single in love youth to married adults with and without
children living at home (Montgomery & Sorrell, 1997). Estimates in nor-
mative populations for high-intensity long-term romantic love range from
11 percent in Spain (Cuenca-Montesino, Graña, & O’Leary, 2015) to roughly
30 to 40 percent in the United States (O’Leary et al., 2011). Finally, as sug-
gested by extensive in-depth interviews it seems that at least some individ-
uals sustain intensely passionate, deeply connected relationships with their
long-term romantic partners (Cuber & Haroff, 1965).
In sum, many major theories of romantic love have assumed that it gen-
erally fades over the course of relationships, and at best may evolve into a
warm, calm, attachment bond. Other research and theoretical perspectives
suggest that there might be natural mechanisms and adaptive functions
that permit romantic love to thrive in long-term marriages. One possibil-
ity for the general belief that romantic love fades in long-term marriages
may be due to the commingling with infatuation (which is characterized
by intrusive thinking, uncertainty, emotional roller coasters, pining for
another) that is often present in the early stages of romantic relationships,
unrequited love, or turbulent relationships. Another possibility may be due
to high levels of romantic love threatening the status quo, as surely sustain-
ing intense passion in a marriage requires motivation, energy, and work,
which must get redirected toward c areers, child rearing, and attending
to matters in the community. In some sense, this reflects some earlier
thinking on this topic as we discussed in the section “A Brief History of
Views on Romantic Love.” However, it’s important to note that norms
about modern marriage are changing rapidly, and many individuals are
increasingly choosing not to marry in modern times. Perhaps this reflects
the thinking of Swiss psychologist Guggenbuhl-Craig who advised that
marriage be reserved for those individuals who are especially gifted and
willing to find their salvation in the intensive, continuous relationship
and dialectical encounter that marriage requires (Guggenbuhl-Craig,
1977). Although recent studies may not provide the answers to these exis-
tential questions about the meaning of love and life, they have, however,
provided us with a more complete story regarding the evolutionary
underpinnings for our drive to love, and have started to shed light on how
romantic love may be sustained over time.
THE BIOLOGICAL BASIS OF ROMANTIC LOVE

AND PAIR-BONDING
In recent decades, the neural basis of monogamous pair-bonding has
increased and become well understood in rodents and other mammals.
More particularly, studies utilizing monogamous prairie voles have identi-
fied key neural circuits underlying social attachment and pair-bonding
(Carter et al., 1995; Insel & Young, 2001). Such mammals are ideal candi-
dates for the study of pair-bonding as they are easily bred in captivity and
are highly social. They display partner preference behaviors including
nest-sharing, proximity-seeking, biparental care of pups, aggression toward
strangers, and the tendency to travel together (e.g., Curtis, Liu, Aragona, &
Wang, 2006; Getz et al., 1981).
Several studies using prairie voles have identified some of the
neuropeptides—oxytocin (OT), vasopressin (AVP), and dopamine (DA)—
and neural circuitry (e.g., nucleus accumbens, ventral pallidum, mesolim-
bic projections) involved in monogamous pair-bond formation (e.g., Aragona
et al., 2003; Gingrich, Liu, Cascio, Wang, & Insel, 2000; Lim & Young, 2004;
Young et al., 2001). Specifically, it has been established that the concentra-
tion of dopamine in the mesocorticolimbic circuitry system is critical in the
formation, expression, and maintenance of monogamous pair-bonds in voles
(Curtis et al., 2006). The mesocorticolimbic dopaminergic pathways consist
of reciprocal innervation between the ventral tegmental area (VTA) and the
medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), and projections from each to the nucleus
accumbens (NAcc) (e.g., Carr & Sesack, 2000; Swanson, 1982). Excitatory
projections from the mPFC exert influences on the VTA and NAcc. This
pathway has been implicated in reward processing, mediating motivated
behaviors, and processes underlying addiction. This system has also been
implicated in the formation and maintenance of pair-bonds in prairie voles
(e.g., Aragona et al., 2003; Curtis et al., 2006; Gingrich et al., 2000).
Humans also display the preference for a specific mate, and although
pair-bonds support reproduction, they also facilitate other functions asso-
ciated with enhanced fitness, such as psychological well-being, life satisfac-
tion, and self-esteem (Acevedo & Aron, 2009; Aron & Henkemeyer, 1995;
O’Leary et al., 2011). Lasting pair-bonds are also beneficial in that they may
be a source of love, affection, companionship, support, and care, beyond
raising offspring (Fisher, 2006). The pair-bond may also be a source of
meaningful events and many memories of a life built together such as the
birth of a child, travels together, a wedding day, quiet moments of walking
along the beach, and supporting each other through both challenging and
joyful times. It is clear that social bonds enrich life in many ways, infusing
it with meaning, hope, celebration, and nurturance.
Increasingly over recent decades, scientists have started to investigate
romantic love (a phenomenon that was once relegated to poets, artists, and
mystics), using sophisticated methodologies, such as functional magnetic
resonance imaging (fMRI), genetic testing, and neurobiological markers
(e.g., hormones). The first fMRI study of romantic love was conducted by
Bartels and Zeki (2000). They examined the neural activations of 17 female
and male participants in love (an average of 2.4 years), while viewing face
images of the partner and three friends of the same gender, and around the
same age and known about as long as the relationship partner. Results
showed activations specific to viewing the partner in the VTA and caudate,
and brain regions involved in awareness, attention, and memory (the middle
insula, anterior cingulate cortex, and posterior hippocampus). Similarly,
Aron et al. (2005) assessed the brain activity of 17 female and male partici-
pants (in love about seven months) while they viewed images of their beloved
versus a neutral person or countback task. Results revealed significant acti-
vations in dopamine-rich areas (VTA), replicating findings of Bartels and
Zeki (2000) implicating brain structures involved in reward processing.
In a third study of romantic love by Ortigue et al. (2007), female partici-
pants (15 months in love on average) viewed subliminal primes related to
their beloved, a passion (i.e., a hobby), or a male friend (around the same
age and known for about the same duration as the partner). Results showed
activations specific to viewing the partner versus the friend in major reward
centers (the VTA, caudate nucleus), and areas involved in face processing
(bilateral fusiform regions), memory, awareness, and self-other processing
(parahippocampal gyri, insula, angular gyrus, frontal and temporal areas).
Interestingly, correlations with PLS scores showed significant activations for
the love-versus-friend contrast in the VTA, caudate nucleus, right parahip-
pocampal gyrus, angular gyrus, insula, and the left dorsolateral frontal
gyrus, highlighting the role of reward, memory, and self-other integration/
processing in romantic love.
Other studies using similar experimental paradigms, but examining early-

stage romantic love in other samples, have also been conducted in China,
for same-sex partners, and comparing individuals newly in love (together
about six months on average) versus those experiencing grief following a
recent breakup with a romantic partner (Fisher, Brown, Aron, Strong, &
Mashek, 2010; Najib et al., 2004; Stoessel et al., 2011; Xu et al., 2010).
In sum, fMRI studies of human romantic love suggest that it is associated
with activation of reward circuits, and other brain regions important for
focused attention, respectively. The dopamine-rich, reward regions activated
in response to a romantic partner have also been implicated in numerous
studies of monetary rewards, drug addiction, food, maternal attachment,
and longing for a deceased loved one in h umans (e.g., O’Connor et al., 2008).
These systems are involved in learning associations between stimuli and
responses, and the motivation to seek out a given reward and work for it,
regardless of whether it is affectively pleasant or unpleasant. Research by
Berridge and Robinson (1998, 2003) suggests that brain mechanisms involved
in “liking or disliking” something (implicit emotion) and “wanting” some-
thing (implicit motivation) are distinct, and that “liking” is not necessary for
“wanting.” Thus, even when lovers experience obstacles, setbacks, or heart-
break, they often keep coming back for more, continuing to crave and work
to be united with their beloved.
Areas implicated in learning and memory (such as the hippocampus)
were also consistently recruited in studies of romantic love. The hippocam-
pus is involved in the encoding and retrieval of memories and is linked
with motivation, emotion, executive, and sensorimotor functions through
connections with other brain regions. Finally, the insula is involved in pro
cessing pain and caress-like touch between individuals (Olausson et al.,
2002) and is thought to be important for social behaviors, emotional and
interpersonal interaction, and m ental illness such as autism (Dapretto et al.,
2006). Studies have confirmed the insula as a visceral sensory/ motor area
(autonomic), motor association area, vestibular area, and language area.
Some have even summarized it as a limbic integration cortex (Augustine,
1996) or the “seat of awareness” (Craig, 2009).
Thus, in addition to confirming commonalities in neural circuits for
human pair-bonds and nonhuman monogamous mammals, this body of
work has also advanced theoretical models about the nature of romantic
love. For example, in prior decades several major theories of romantic love
described it as an emotion. Some of these ideas were based on studies show-
ing that love is one of the most commonly mentioned emotions by lay-
people (Fehr & Russel, 1984; Shaver, Schwartz, Kirson, & O’Connor, 1987).
Others have also noted that love is an emotion with observable behavior
patterns (e.g., Gonzaga et al., 2001, 2006); and other researchers suggested
that when considered a “momentary surge,” love does fit the model of a basic
emotion (Shaver, Morgan, & Wu, 1996).
Indeed, there has been some controversy regarding the emotional nature
of love as it may evoke many different emotions depending on the context.
For example, in general, when love is fulfilled it brings g reat joy and when
thwarted it is often associated with suffering and sorrow. However, this is
not always the case. For some, the notion of love and commitment may stir
fear if they have been hurt in the past or have an avoidant attachment style.
Love can also stir excitement and inspire lovers into action, and in the face
of threat (such as a potential alternative for one’s mate or rejection) it may
evoke anger and/or fear.
In recent decades, neuroimaging studies have provided some clarity
regarding love’s nature showing, with a variety of experimental paradigms,
and varying samples and relationship stages, that it is mainly associated with
activation of the brain’s reward system (for review, see Acevedo, 2015), which
is involved in “wanting,” “craving,” and working for rewards (e.g., Berridge &
Robinson, 1998, 2003; Carter et al., 2009; O’Doherty et al., 2004), as basic
as food and sex. This highlights the evolutionary importance of love as a
basic biological drive. Importantly, none of the human studies on romantic
love found activation of the amygdala—an area that is well known for its
role in processing salient emotional stimuli—and some studies even showed
amygdala deactivation (for review, see Zeki, 2007). This has been thought to
be evidence of the “decreased judgment” or “positive rosy glow,” commonly
termed the “love is blind” effect, that lovers often experience in the early
stages of relationships, when infatuation is generally high. In sum, brain
studies of romantic love support theories suggesting that it is a basic h
uman
motivation, such as “a longing for union with a beloved” (Hatfield & Spre-
cher, 1986), “a basic human motivation to expand the self” (Aron & Aron,
1986), or even a basic biological drive whose function is to promote success-
ful propagation of the species (e.g., Buss, 2006; Fisher, 2006).
CAN LOVE LAST?

Another major controversy that empirical and recent neuroimaging
studies of love clarified was whether intense romantic love could exist in
long-term relationships, and if so what it is like. One landmark sociological
study on typologies of marriages by Cuber and Haroff (1965) delineated
five different types of marriages based on systematic interviews with 500
Americans married 10 years or more. They described “conflict-habituated”
couples whose marriages are filled with tension and conflict; “devitalized”
marriages as ones where passion and excitement were once present but have
since died out; “passive-congenial” c ouples as those that have always been
passionless; “vital” marriages as those where couples are highly engaged
with one another but maintain their own individual identities; and “total”
couples are those that share in all aspects of life together with ease and pas-
sion. “Total” c ouples often share life goals or a common life mission. For
example, one partner may contribute to the advancement of society through
educating youth while the other partner may give back through activism;
and some total c ouples share in joint career ventures. Many partners in this
type of relationship are conscientious individuals that join forces to create
lives that reflect goals of advancing society, some through c areer aspirations
and others perhaps through the raising of children. The vital and total
couples seem to depict that at least some c ouples sustain intensely pas-
sionate, deeply connected relationships long-term. Qualitative research by
Tennov (1979) suggested that love could occur at any age, and other stud-
ies revealed no significant differences in romantic love across life stages—
from single in love youth to married adults with and without c hildren living
at home (Montgomery & Sorrell, 1997).
As part of my doctoral work at Stony Brook University, I set out to inves-
tigate whether love could last. Before I embarked on investigating the neu-
ral correlates of long-term romantic love, I started off by doing qualitative
interviews with couples in the community. What t hese interviews revealed
was that p eople in long-term marriages self-reporting intense romantic love
for a partner w ere not crazy, delusional, or lying. Rather they w ere highly
functional, happy, optimistic individuals with rich family lives, careers, and
interests that somehow managed to sustain high levels of passion for their
partner (Acevedo & Aron, 2009). Also, a meta-analysis of 25 studies exam-
ining romantic love found that high levels of romantic love (without obses-
sion) could exist in long-term marriages, and that it was associated with
relationship satisfaction and high self-esteem (Acevedo & Aron, 2009).
Next, my colleagues and I conducted a random-digit dialing study of indi-
viduals married 10 years or more in New York City and around the United
States to examine the prevalence and correlates of high levels of self-
reported love in individuals married 10 years or more (O’Leary et al., 2011).
Both studies showed that roughly 30 to 40 percent of individuals reported
being “very intensely in love” with their long-term spouse at the time of the
study. Further, these studies showed that significant correlates of intense
love in long-term couples were thinking positively about the partner and
thinking about the partner when apart, showing affectionate behaviors
and having sexual intercourse, sharing novel and challenging activities,
and having general life happiness.
Realizing that people may be skeptical of self-reports, due to social desir-
ability biases and the like, my colleagues and I went on to examine the
neural correlates of long-term romantic love (Acevedo et al., 2011). In this
study, we scanned the brains of 17 men and w omen married roughly
25 years on average, while they viewed face images of their spouse, a highly
familiar neutral person (as a control for facial familiarity), and a close friend
(control for closeness and social affiliation). We then compared the neural
pattern of activations with t hose reported in studies of early-stage roman-
tic love as well as maternal love. One question we had was w hether indi-
viduals in long-term, in-love marriages would show activation patterns
similar to newly in-love persons. Another question we explored was whether
long-term pair-bonds share neural circuits with basic parent-infant attach-
ment bonds, as suggested by attachment theory (Ainsworth, 1991). Our
results showed significant partner-specific activations (relative to both con-
trol conditions) in the VTA and other reward centers, as well as the insula
and hippocampus—replicating results for early-stage romantic love (e.g.,
Aron et al., 2005). Neural commonalities for pair-bonds with parent-infant
attachment w ere shown in reward areas that are rich in dopamine and
opiods—neurochemicals that are associated with motivation, euphoria,
energy, and calm. Specifically, activation of the globus pallidus, an area that
is involved in “liking” of rewards (Smith et al., 2009), was commonly shown
for romantic love and maternal attachment, highlighting the role of warmth
and attachment. Also, regions rich in serotonin receptors, namely the raphe,
showed commonalities for romantic love and attachment. Serotonin is crit-
ical for the regulation of mood, anxiety, and ruminating thoughts, and it
has also shown involvement in “spiritual experiences.” Moreover, overlap
for romantic and maternal love was shown in regions implicated in atten-
tion, arousal, and visceral sensations (namely the cingulate, mid-insula, and
insular cortex).
In recent decades self-report and brain-imaging studies have helped
researchers to clarify a few major questions about the nature of romantic
love. One issue that was clarified was defining what romantic love actually
is. Some researchers relied on studies of laypeople’s accounts of romantic
love and suggested that it was an emotion. Other researchers proposed that
it is a motivation or basic biological drive. Neuroimaging studies have
helped to settle this debate by showing that romantic love mainly evokes
brain regions implicated in reward processing, attention, memory, and the
release of neuropeptides involved in social bonding, euphoria, and pain
suppression (namely OT, AVP, opioids, and serotonin). Recruitment of neu-
ral structures rich in dopamine, OT, AVP, opioids, and serotonin show how
the brain may mediate complex behaviors related to mating and attach-
ment, such as proximity-seeking and desire for union; as well as more com-
plex psychological phenomenon such as “self-expansion” and “movement
towards the ideal self.” Th
ese results also highlight the critical role that
reward, motivation, attention, memory, calm, and self-other processing play
in forming and maintaining pair-bonds. Another major controversy that
has become resolved pertains to the question of w hether intense romantic
love (with passion, engagement, and sexual desire) can exist in long-term
relationships. A series of studies showed that romantic love can exist in
long-term relationships, and further they clarified the issue by parsing out
obsession/mania from romantic love (with engagement, intensity, and sex-
ual attraction). One neuroimaging study with individuals in long-term
marriages also showed similar neural circuits for long-term pair-bonders
as those seen in studies with newly in-love persons (Acevedo et al., 2011).
Moreover, this study showed overlapping neural circuits with parent-
infant bonds adding to the conjecture that t here are basic attachment pro
cesses underlying pair-bonds that may share features with other significant
attachments.
CONCLUSION
In recent decades science has made significant strides in understanding
the nature of romantic love. Studies suggest that romantic love (without
obsession) is associated with well-being, life satisfaction, self-esteem, and
relationship satisfaction. Neuroimaging studies, mainly, have also started
to elucidate the neural, hormonal, and genetic correlates of romantic love.
This body of work (in addition to self-report studies) suggests that romantic
love is a basic motivation being associated with the reward system, as well
as other limbic structures associated with memory and attention. How-
ever, specific emotions may vary depending on the context. Thus, even if
thwarted or unpleasant if romantic love is present, the “drive” to be united
with a beloved remains alive. These studies have also shown that romantic
love can exist at all ages and stages of relationships. Thus, beyond reproduc-
tion brain and genetic studies suggest that romantic love may serve other
functions long-term, such as companionship, care, and optimism (Acevedo
et al., 2012; Acevedo, Poulin, & Brown, under review). Recent studies also
suggest genetic variations may facilitate stable, high-quality pair-bonds
that include sexual satisfaction, compassion, and high levels of reward and
romantic love (Acevedo et al., under review). In spite of genetic predisposi-
tions, c ouples may also promote relationship enhancing properties by con-
tinued self-expansion such as through shared engagement in novel and
challenging activities. Perhaps there are other natural mechanisms that
may promote sustained romantic love (which ultimately promotes well-
being and familial happiness and stability) that f uture generations of rela-
tionship scientists w ill help uncover and in turn expand our understanding
of the positive psychology of one of life’s greatest prizes. Long live love.
REFERENCES
Acevedo, B. (2015). Neural correlates of h
uman attachment: Evidence from fMRI
studies of adult pair-bonding. In V. Zayas & C. Hazan (Eds.), Bases of adult
attachment: From brain to mind to behavior. New York: Springer.
Acevedo, B., & Aron A. (2013). Romantic love, pair-bonding, and the dopaminer-
gic reward system. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Nature and
development of social connections: From brain to group. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Acevedo, B., Aron, A., Xu, X., & Lewandowski, G. (2017). Foundations for couples:
Love and self-expansion. In J. Fitzgerald (Ed.), Foundations for couples’ ther-
apy: Research for the real world. New York: Routledge.
Acevedo, B., Poulin, M., & Brown, L. (under review) Human pair-bonding: Neural
and genetic correlates reveal phylogenetically conserved brain systems.
Acevedo, B., Poulin, M., Collins, N., Grafton, S., & Brown, L. (under review). The
mindful marriage: Neural and genetic correlates of pair-bonding in newly-
wed marriages.
Acevedo, B. P., & Aron, A. (2009). Does a long-term relationship kill romantic love?
Review of General Psychology, 13, 59–65.
Acevedo, B. P., Aron, A., Fisher H., & Brown, L. L. (2011). Neural correlates of long-
term intense romantic love. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7,
145–159.
Acevedo, B., Aron A., Fisher, H., Brown, L. (2012). Neural correlates of marital sat-
isfaction and well-being: Reward, empathy, and affect. Journal of Clinical
Neuropsychiatry, 9, 20–31.
Acevedo, B. P., Aron, A., Gross, J. J., Xu, X., & Ralte, Z. (2010). Is love different from
“basic” emotions? Valence, complexity, and emotion regulation. Manuscript
submitted for publication.
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1991). Attachments and other affectional bonds across the
life cycle. In C. M. Parkes, J. Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris (Eds.). Attach-
ment across the life cycle (pp. 33–51). New York: Tavistock/Routledge.
Aragona, B. J., Liu, Y, Curtis, J. T., Stephan, F. K., & Wang, Z. (2003). A critical role
for nucleus accumbens dopamine in partner-preference formation in male
prairie voles. Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 3483–3490.
Aron, A., & Aron, E. (1986). Love and the expansion of self: Understanding attrac-
tion and satisfaction. New York: Hemisphere.
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of other in the Self Scale and
the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social
Aron, A., Fisher, H., Mashek, D., Strong, G., Li, H., & Brown, L. (2005). Reward,
motivation and emotion systems associated with early-stage intense roman-
tic love. Journal of Neurophysiology, 93, 327–337.
Aron, A., & Henkemeyer, L. (1995). Marital satisfaction and passionate love. Jour-
nal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 141–149.
Aron, A., Norman, C. C., Aron, E. N., McKenna, C., & Heyman, R. (2000). C ouples’
shared participation in novel and arousing activities and experienced rela-
tionship quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 273–283.
Augustine, J. R. (1996). Circuitry and functional aspects of the insular lobe in pri-
mates including humans. Brain Research Reviews, 22(3), 229–244.
Bales, K. L., Mason, W. A., Catana, C., Cherry, S. R., & Mendoza, S. P. (2007). Neu-
ral correlates of pair-bonding in a monogamous primate. Brain Research,
1184, 245–253.
Bartels, A., & Zeki, S. (2000). The neural basis of romantic love. NeuroReport: For
Rapid Communication of Neuroscience Research, 11, 3829–3834.
Bartels, A., & Zeki, S. (2004). The neural correlates of maternal and romantic love.
NeuroImage, 21, 1155–1166.
Baumeister, R. F., & Bratslavsky, E. (1999). Passion, intimacy, and time: Passionate
love as a function of change in intimacy. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 3(1), 46–67.
Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (1998). What is the role of dopamine in reward:
Hedonic impact, reward learning, or incentive salience? Brain Research
Reviews, 28, 309–369.
Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (2003). Addiction. Annual Review of Psychology,
54, 25–53.
Berscheid, E. (1983). Emotion. In H. H. Kelley, E. Berscheid, A. Christensen,
J. H. Harvey, T. L. Huston, G. Levinger, E. McClintock, L. A. Peplau, &
D. R. Peterson (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 110–168). New York: Freeman.
Berscheid, E., & Hatfield, E. (1969). Interpersonal attraction. New York:
Addison-Wesley.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Attachment (Vol. 1). London: Hogarth.
Bush, G., Luu, P., & Posner, M. I. (2000). Cognitive and emotional influences in
anterior cingulate cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 215–222.
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in h uman mate preferences: Evolutionary
hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.
Buss, D. M. (2006). The evolution of love. In R. Sternberg & K. Weis (Eds.), The new
psychology of love (pp. 65–86). New Haven: Yale University Press.
Cacioppo, S., Grafton, S. T., & Bianchi-Demicheli, F. (2012). The speed of passion-
ate love, as a subliminal prime: A high-density electrical neuroimaging
study. NeuroQuantology, 10, 715–724.
Camara, E., Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Ye, Z., & Munte, T. F. (2009). Reward networks
in the brain captured by connectivity measures. Frontiers in Neuroscience,
3, 350–362.
Carr, D. B., & Sesack, S. R. (2000). Projections from the rat prefrontal cortex to the
ventral tegmental area: Target specificity in the synaptic associations with
mesoaccumbens and mesocortical neurons. The Journal of Neuroscience,
20(10), 3864–3873.
Carter, C. S. (1998). Neuroendocrine perspectives on social attachment and love.
Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23, 779–818.
Carter, C. S., DeVries, A. C., Taymans, S. E., Roberts, R. L., Williams, J. R., Chrou-
sos, G. P. (1995). Adrenocorticoid hormones and the development and
expression of mammalian monogamy. Annals of the New York Academy of
Sciences, 771, 82–91.
Carter, R. M., MacInnes, J. J., Huettel, S. A., & Adcock, R. A. (2009). Activation in
the VTA and nucleus accumbens increases in anticipation of both gains and
losses. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 3(21), 1–15.
Coan, J. A., Schaefer, H. S., & Davidson, R. J. (2006). Lending a hand: Social regula-
tion of the neural response to threat. Psychological Science, 17, 1032–1039.
Coontz, S. (2005). Marriage, a history. From obedience to intimacy or how love
conquered marriage. New York: Viking.
Coulter, K., & Malouff, J. M. (2013). Effects of an intervention designed to enhance

romantic relationship excitement: A randomized-control trial. Couple and
Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 2, 34–44. doi:10.1037/a0031719
Craig, A. D. (2009). How do you feel—Now? The anterior insula and human aware-
ness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10, 59–70.
Cuber, J. F., & Haroff, P. B. (1965). The significant Americans. New York:
Appleton-Century.
Cuenca-Montesino, M. L. C., Grana, J. L. G., & O’Leary, K. D. (2015). Intensity of
love in a community sample of Spanish c ouples in the region of Madrid. The
Spanish Journal of Psychology, 18, 1–9.
Curtis, J. T., Liu, Y., Aragona, B. J., & Wang, Z. (2006). Dopamine and monogamy.
Brain Research, 1126(1), 76–90.
Dapretto, M., Davies, M. S., Pfeifer, J. H., Scott, A. A., Sigman, M., Bookheimer,
S. Y., & Iacoboni, M. (2006). Understanding emotions in o thers: Mirror
neuron dysfunction in children with autism spectrum disorders. Nature
Neuroscience, 9(1), 28–30.
D’Ardenne, K., McClure, S. M., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2008). BOLD
responses reflecting dopaminergic signals in the human ventral tegmental
area. Science, 319, 1264–1267.
Decker, M. W., Curzon, P., & Brioni, J. D. (1995). Influence of separate and com-
bined septal and amygdala lesions on memory, acoustic startle, anxiety, and
locomotor activity in rats. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 64,
156–168.
Degroot, A., & Treit, D. (2004). Anxiety is functionally segregated within the septo-
hippocampal system. Brain Research, 101, 60–71.
Delgado, M. R., Locke, H. M., Stenger, V. A., & Fiez, J. A. (2003). Dorsal striatum
responses to reward and punishment: Effects of valence and magnitude
manipulations. Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 3, 27–38.
Dion, K. K., & Dion, K. L. (1991). Psychological individualism and romantic love.
Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 17–33.
Drigotas, S. M., Rusbult, C., Wieselquist, J., & Whitton, S. W. (1999). Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 2, 293–323.
Fehr, B., & Russell, J. A. (1984). Concept of emotion viewed from a prototype per-
spective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 464–486.
Fernandez, G., & Kroes, M. C. (2010). Protecting endangered memories. Nature
Neuroscience, 13, 408–410.
Fisher, H. E. (1992). Anatomy of love: The natural history of monogamy, adultery,
and divorce. New York: Norton.
Fisher, H. E. (1998). Lust, attraction, and attachment in mammalian reproduction.
Human Nature, 9, 23–52.
Fisher, H. E. (2004). Why we love: The nature and chemistry of romantic love. New
York: Henry Holt.
Fisher, H. E. (2006). The drive to love. In R. Sternberg & K. Weis (Eds.), The new
psychology of love (pp. 87–115). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Fisher, H. E., Brown, L. L., Aron, A., Strong, G., & Mashek, D. (2010). Reward, addic-
tion, and emotion regulation systems associated with rejection in love.
Journal of Neurophysiology, 104, 51–60.
Flores, P. J. (2001). Addiction as an attachment disorder: Implications for group

therapy. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 51, 63–81.
Freud, S. (1921). Massenpsychologie und Ich-Analyse. Internationaler Psychoana-
lytischer Verlag, Wien.
Fromm, E. (1956). Love and its disintegration. Pastoral Psychology, 7(68), 37–44.
Getz, L. L., Carter, C. S., & Gavish, L. (1981). The mating system of the prairie vole,
Microtus ochrogaster: Field and laboratory evidence for pair-bonding.
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 8(3), 189–194.
Gingrich, B., Liu, Y., Cascio, C., Wang, Z., Insel, T. R. (2000). Dopamine D2 recep-
tors in the nucleus accumbens are important for social attachment in female
prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster). Behavioral Neuroscience, 114(1),
173–183.
Gonzaga, G. C., Keltner, D., Londahl, E. A., & Smith, M. D. (2001). Love and the
commitment problem in romantic relations and friendship. Journal of Per-
Gonzaga, G. C., Turner, R. A., Keltner, D., Campos, B., & Altemus, M. (2006). Roman-
tic love and sexual desire in close relationships. Emotion, 6, 163–179.
Grote, N. K., & Frieze, I. H. (1994). The measurement of friendship-based love in
intimate relationships. Personal Relationship, 1, 275–300.
Guggenbuhl-Craig, A. (1977). Marriage: Dead or alive. Putnam, CT: Spring
Publications.
Hare, T. A., O’Doherty, J., Camerer, C. F., Schultz, W., & Rangel, A. (2008). Disso-
ciating the role of the orbitofrontal cortex and the striatum in the compu-
tation of goal values and prediction errors. Journal of Neuroscience, 28,
5623–5630.
Hatfield, E., Traupmann, J., & Sprecher, S. (1984). Older women’s perceptions of
their intimate relationships. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 2(2),
108–124. doi:10.1521/jscp.1984.2.2.108
Hatfield, E., & Sprecher, S. (1986). Measuring passionate love in intimate relation-
ships. Journal of Adolescence, 9, 383–410.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment
process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511–524.
Heinz, A., Siessmeier, T., Wrase, J., et. al. (2004). Correlation between dopamine
D2 receptors in the ventral striatum and central processing of alcohol cues
and craving. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 161, 1783–1789.
Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S. S. (1986). A theory and method of love. Journal of Per-
Hendrick, S. S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 50, 93–98.
Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (1992). Romantic love. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Huston, T. L., Houts, R. M., Caughlin, J. P., Smith, S. E., & George, L. J. (2001). The
connubial crucible: Newlywed years as predictors of marital delight,
distress, and divorce. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80,
237–252.
Inagaki, T. K., & Eisenberger, N. I. (2012). Neural correlates of giving support to a
loved one. Psychosomatic Medicine, 74(1), 3–7. doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e318
2359335
Insel, T. R., Wang, Z. X., & Ferris, C. F. (1994). Patterns of brain vasopressin recep-
tor distribution associated with social organization in microtine rodents.
Journal of Neuroscience, 14, 5381–5392.
Insel, T. R., & Young, L. J. (2001). The neurobiology of attachment. Nature Reviews
Neuroscience, 2(2), 129–136.
Jankowiak, W. R., & Fischer, E. F (1992). A cross-cultural perspective on romantic
love. Ethnology, 31(2), 149–155. doi:10.2307/3773618
Jenkins, J. S., Ang, V. T., Hawthorn, J., Rossor, M. N., & Iversen, L. L. (1984). Vaso-
pressin, oxytocin and neurophysins in the h uman brain and spinal cord.
Brain Research, 291, 111–117.
Kemppainen, H., Raivio, N., Suo-Yrjo, V., & Kiianmaa, K. (2012). Opioidergic mod-
ulation of ethanol self-administration in the ventral pallidum. Alcoholism,
Clinical and Experimental Research, 36, 286–293.
Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., Glaser, R., Cacioppo, C., & Malarkey, W. B. (1998). Marital
stress: Immunologic, neuroendocrine, and autonomic correlates. Annals of
the New York Academy of Sciences, 840, 656–663.
Knutson, B., Fong, G. W., Adams, C. M., Varner, J. L., & Hommer, D. (2001). Dis-
sociation of reward anticipation and outcome with event-related fMRI.
NeuroReport, 12, 3683–3687.
Knutson, B., & Greer, S. M. (2008). Anticipatory affect: Neural correlates and con-
sequences for choice. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 363,
3771–3786.
Kolodny, N. (2003). Love as valuing a relationship. The Philosophical Review, 112(2),
135–189. Retrieved from http://w ww.jstor.org/stable/3595532
Ledbetter, A. M. (2013). Relational maintenance and inclusion of other in the self:
Measure development and dyadic test of a self-expansion theory approach.
Southern Communication Journal, 78, 289–310. doi:10.1080/1041794X
.2013.815265
Lee, J. A. (1977). A typology of styles of loving. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 3, 173–182.
Lewis, T., Amini, F., & Lannon, R. (2000). A general theory of love. New York: Ran-
dom House.
Lim, M. M., & Young, L. J. (2006). Neuropeptidergic regulation of affiliative
behavior and social bonding in animals. Hormones and Behavior, 50(4),
506–517.
Lozano, A., Mayberg, H., Giacobbe, P., Hamani, C., Craddock, R., & Kennedy, S.
(2008). Subcallosal cingulate gyrus deep brain stimulation for treatment-
resistant depression. Biological Psychiatry, 64, 461–467.
MacLean, P. D. (1990). The triune brain in evolution: Role in paleocerebral func-
tions. New York: Plenum Press.
Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., & Miller, S. L. (2009). The implicit cognition of rela-
tionship maintenance: Inattention to attractive alternatives. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 174–179.
Masuda, M. (2003). Meta-analyses of love scales: Do various love scales measure the
same psychological constructs? Japanese Psychological Research, 45, 25–37.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynam-
ics, and change. New York: Guilford Press.
Montgomery, M. J., & Sorell, G. T. (1997). Differences in love attributes across

family life stages. Family Relations, 46, 55–61.
Murrough, J. W., Henry, S., Hu, J., Gallezot, J. D., Planeta, W. B., Neumaier, J. F.,
et al. (2011). Reduced ventral striatal/ventral pallidal serotonin1B receptor
binding potential in major depressive disorder. Psychopharmacology, 213,
547–553.
Myers, S. A., & Berscheid, E. (1997). The language of love: The difference a preposi-
tion makes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 347–362.
Najib, A., Lorberbaum, J. P., Kose, S., Bohning, D. E., & George, M. S. (2004).
Regional brain activity in women grieving a romantic relationship breakup.
The American Journal of Psychiatry, 161, 2245–2256.
O’Connor, M. F., Wellisch, D. K., Stanton, A. L., Eisenberger, N. I., Irwin, M. R., &
Lieberman, M. D. (2008). Craving love? Enduring grief activates brain’s
reward center. NeuroImage, 42, 969–972.
O’Doherty, J., Dayan, P., Schultz, J., Deichmann, R., Friston, K., & Dolan, R. J. (2004).
Dissociable roles of ventral and dorsal striatum in instrumental condition-
ing. Science, 304, 452–454.
Olausson, H., Lamarre, Y., Backlund, H., Morin, C., Wallin, B.G., Starck, G.,
Ekholm, S., Strigo, I., Worsley, K., Vallbo, A.B., et al. (2002). Unmyelinated
tactile afferents signal touch and project to insular cortex. Nature Neuro-
science, 5(9), 900–904.
O’Leary, K. D., Acevedo, B. P., Aron, A., Huddy, L., & Mashek, D. (2011). Is long-
term love more than a rare phenomenon? If so, what are its correlates? Social
Psychology and Personality Science, 3, 241–249.
Ortigue, S., Bianchi-Demicheli, F., Hamilton, A. F., & Grafton, S. T. (2007). The neu-
ral basis of love as a subliminal prime: An event-related fMRI study. Jour-
nal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1218–1230.
Prossin, A. R., Love, T. M., Koeppe, R. A., Zubieta, J. K., & Silk, K. R. (2010). Dys-
regulation of regional endogenous opioid function in borderline personal-
ity disorder. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 925–933.
Proulx, C., Helms, H., & Buehler, C. (2007). Marital quality and personal well-
being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 576–593.
Reissmann, C., Aron, A., & Bergen, M. (1993). Shared activities and marital satis-
faction: Causal direction and self-expansion versus boredom. Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 243–254.
Riehl-Emde, A., Thomas, V., & Willi, J. (2003). Love: An important dimension in
marital research and therapy. Family Process, 42, 253–267.
Risinger, R. C., Salmeron, B. J., Ross, T. J., Amen, S. L., Sanfilipo, M., Hoffmann,
R. G., et al. (2005). Neural correlates of high and craving during cocaine
self-administration using BOLD fMRI. NeuroImage, 26, 1097–1108.
Rousar, E. (1990). Valuing’s role in romantic love. Doctoral dissertation. Pacific
Graduate School of Psychology, Palo Alto, CA.
Rusbult, C. E., Van Lange, P. A. M., Wildschut, T, Yovetich, N. A., & Verette, J.
(2000). Perceived superiority in close relationships: Why it exists and per-
sists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 521–545. [PubMed]
Sbarra, D., & Hazan, C. (2008). Co-regulation, dysregulation, self-regulation: An
integrative analysis and empirical agenda for understanding adult attachment,
separation, loss, and recovery. Personality and Social Psychology Review,

12, 141–167.
Schindler, I., Paech, J., & Löwenbrück, F. (2014). Linking admiration and adoration
to self-expansion: Different ways to enhance one’s potential. Cognition and
Emotion. Epub ahead of print. doi:10.1080/02699931.2014.903230
Schultz, W. (2001). Reward signaling by dopamine neurons. The Neuroscientist, 7,
293–302.
Shaver, P. R., Morgan, H. J., & Wu, S. (1996). Is love a “basic” emotion? Personal
Relationships, 3, 81–96.
Shaver, P., Schwartz, J., Kirson, D., & O’Connor, C. (1987). Emotion knowledge: Fur-
ther exploration of a prototype approach. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 52, 1061–1086.
Simpson, J. A., Campbell, B., & Berscheid, E. (1986). The association between
romantic love and marriage: Kephart (1967) twice revisited. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 363–372.
Singer, T., Seymour, B., O’Doherty, J., Kaube, H., Dolan, R., & Frith, C. (2004).
Empathy for pain involves the affective but not sensory components of pain.
Science, 303, 1157–1162.
Singer, T., Seymour, B., O’Doherty, J. P., Stephan, K. E., Dolan, R. J., & Frith, C. D.
(2006). Empathic neural responses are modulated by the perceived fairness
of others. Nature, 439(7075), 466–469.
Small, D. M., Gregory, M. D., Mak, Y. E., Gitelman, D., Mesulam, M. M., & Par-
rish, T. (2003). Dissociation of neural representation of intensity and affec-
tive valuation in human gustation. Neuron, 39, 701–711.
Smith, K. S., Tindell, A. J., Aldridge, J. W., & Berridge, K. C. (2009). Ventral pallidum
roles in reward and motivation. Behavioral and Brain Research, 196, 155–167.
Stoessel, C., Stiller, J., Bleich, S., Boensch, D., Doerfler, A., Garcia, M., & Forster, C.
(2011). Differences and similarities on neuronal activities of people being
happily and unhappily in love: A functional magnetic resonance imaging
study. Neuropsychobiology, 64, 52–60.
Swanson, L. W. (1982). The projections of the ventral tegmental area and adjacent
regions: A combined fluorescent retrograde tracer and immunofluorescence
study in the rat. Brain Research Bulletin, 9, 321–353.
Tennov, D. (1979). Love and limerence: The experience of being in love. New York:
Stein & Day.
Ursu, S., Stenger, V. A., Shear, M. K., Jones, M. R., & Carter, C. S. (2003). Overac-
tive action monitoring in obsessive-compulsive disorder: Evidence from
functional magnetic resonance imaging. Psychological Science, 14, 347–353.
Vann, S. D., Denby, C., Love, S., Montaldi, D., Renowden, S., & Coakham, H. B.
(2008). Memory loss resulting from fornix and septal damage: Impaired
supra-span recall but preserved recognition over a 24-hour delay. Neuro-
psychology, 22, 658–668.
Walsh, A. (1991). The science of love: Understanding love and its effects on mind
and body. New York: Prometheus Books.
Walum, H., et al. (2008). Genet ic variation in the vasopressin receptor 1a gene
(AVPR1A) associates with pair-bonding behavior in humans. PNAS, 105,
14153–14156.
Wang, Z. X, Hulihan, T. J., & Insel, T. R. (1997). Sexual and social experience is
associated with different patterns of behavior and neural activation in male
prairie voles. Brain Research, 767(2), 321–332.
Winslow, J., Hastings, N., Carter, C. S., Harbaugh, C., & Insel, T. R. (1993). A role
of central vasopressin in pair bondings in monogamous prairie voles.
Nature, 365, 545–548.
Xu, X., Aron, A., Brown, L., Cao, G., Feng, T., & Weng, X. (2010). Reward and moti-
vation systems: A brain mapping study of early-stage intense romantic love
in Chinese participants. Human Brain Mapping, 32, 249–257.
Xu, X., Brown, L., Aron, A., Acevedo, B., Cao, G., Feng, T., & Weng, X. (in press).
Regional brain activity during early-stage intense romantic love predicted
relationship outcomes after 40 months: An fMRI assessment. Social Psy
chology and Personality Science.
Young, L. J., Lim, M. M., Gingrich, B., & Insel, T. R. (2001). Cellular mechanisms
of social attachment. Hormones and Behavior, 40, 133–138.
Zeki, S. (2007). The neurobiology of love. FEBS Letters, 581, 2575–2579.
Zeki, S., & Romaya, J. P. (2010). The brain reaction to viewing faces of opposite-
and same-sex romantic partners. PLoS ONE, 5(12), e15802. doi:10.1371/
journal.pone.0015802
5
oward a Positive Psychology of
T
Online Romantic Relationships:
A New Frontier?
Richard A. Dowlat and Stewart I. Donaldson
INTRODUCTION
Most research on romantic relationships is based on studying traditional
face-to-face relationships. However, the number of p
eople dating online in
the United States has grown by leaps and bounds in the past decade (Smith &
Duggan, 2013). This exploratory chapter reviews the nascent literature and
empirical research on online relationships and asks the question: How can
positive psychology contribute to promoting high-quality romantic rela-
tionships online? That is, in what ways might positive psychology theory,
research, and applications be used to understand and potentially improve
romantic relationships being formed and at least partially maintained
online?
ONLINE DATING
With the advent of the Internet, romantic relationship formation has
taken on a whole new dimension. In the United States alone, at least 1 in 10
adults are using some sort of Internet-based dating program to talk to
77
eople, and the majority of t hese users actually go on a date with someone
p
whom they’ve met online (Smith & Duggan, 2013). Online dating is a grow-
ing part of our world.
Match.com, created in 1995, is largely credited with being the first offi-
cial online dating service (Finkel, Eastwick, Karney, Reis, & Sprecher, 2012).
Although initially surrounded by skepticism, stigma, and controversy,
online dating has since integrated exceptionally to become a staple in U.S.
culture. At first, t here was a stigma surrounding single individuals who
engaged in online dating. Some research suggests they w ere categorizing
as immature, self-centered, and socially maladjusted (Depaulo & Morris,
2006), or considered socially inept or simply desperate (Finkel et al., 2012).
Moreover, in the early days of Internet communication it was rare to talk
to and meet a stranger from the Internet. It was commonly believed it was
dangerous and could lead to an encounter with a violent, predatory, or
otherwise disturbed person.
However, the online dating population has grown tremendously over
the past two decades. Data from 2005 estimated that at least 13 percent of
all U.S. adults currently engage in some form of online dating (Smith &
Duggan, 2013). Further research showed that this percentage has grown
to at least 20 percent (Finkel et al., 2012). As online dating has increased
in popularity and use, the negative conceptions surrounding it have slowly
dissipated. As p eople used and experienced online dating, and realized
the demographic makeup of online dating w asn’t all that different from
the offline world, the stigma associated appeared reduced (Finkel et al.,
2012).
Online dating population. Research on the demographics of the online
dating population paints an increasingly clear picture. Although initially
surrounded by rumors of danger and ill repute, online dating has grown
into a more popular and socially accepted practice (Finkel et al., 2012).
Data from the Pew Research Center (Smith & Duggan, 2013) claim that
1 in 10 Americans use some sort of online medium for dating, whether
it be an online website, mobile application, or something e lse. The self-
reported 10 percent of the population that engages in online dating is
largely middle-aged, with roughly 20 percent of individuals from their
mid-20s through mid-40s reporting having used some online dating plat-
form. When polling for Americans who are single and actively looking for
a partner, this percentage jumps to almost 40 percent of the population
(Smith & Duggan, 2013; Valkenburg & Peter, 2007). When asked why they
were dating online, most people responded that they w ere looking for a
relationship, followed closely by people who were just looking or curious.
A small percentage of people were looking for friends or casual sex, and an
even smaller percentage were there at the recommendation of a friend
(Hitsch, Hortaçsu, & Ariely, 2006, 2010). Of the online dating population,
Toward a Positive Psychology of Online Romantic Relationship 79
approximately two-thirds report having gone on a date with someone

they met online, an almost 20 percent increase from the decade prior.
From the group of online daters, almost a quarter report having met a
long-term significant other through some online dating means (Smith &
Duggan, 2013).
Outside the United States, the data paint a similar picture. In a sample
of 357 Dutch participants between ages 18 and 60, 43 percent report hav-
ing engaged in online dating. Demographically, data show that although
men may visit online dating sites more often, t here is no statistically sig-
nificant difference between male and female profiles on online dating sites
(Valkenburg & Peter, 2007). The majority of the online daters w ere between
the ages of 30 and 50, with the most active group being around 40 years of
age; the authors postulate this activity in this age group is due to the diffi-
culty in meeting a romantic partner using traditional methods at this age.
From this sample, it was also observed that individuals who engaged in
online dating were low in dating anxiety. This again goes against the ste
reot ype of online daters as socially maladjusted; at the onset of the paper
the authors claim that a common conception of online daters is that they
are socially inept, and thus turn to online dating to seek a partner. Results
from their data disconfirm this hypothesis, however, such that the sample
of online daters did not appear to have high levels of dating anxiety. Instead,
the widespread permeation of the Internet in the general population allows
for the sample of online daters to increasingly reflect that of the general
population.
Perception of online daters. In the eyes of the general population, the
majority of individuals who use the Internet believe that online dating is
“a good way to meet p eople,” up 15 percent from 44 percent in 2005 to
59 percent (Smith & Duggan, 2013). Conversely, only 21 percent of p eople
who use the Internet think online daters are “desperate,” down 8 percent
from 29 percent of Internet users in 2005. Of those who actually date online,
70 percent think it allows for finding a good match b ecause it provides
access to a wide pool of potential partners, and almost 80 percent believe
that it is a good way to meet people.
Evidently, as the online dating population continues to grow, and as
online dating as an activity continues to ingrain itself in global cultures, the
perception of online dating continues to positively shift. Extrapolating from
the given data (Smith & Duggan, 2013; Valkenburg & Peter, 2007), one could
speculate the increasing online dating population w ill continue to grow to
approximate the demographics of the population of which it is a subset. Fea-
sibly, there may even come a point where online dating may be seen as the
norm for mate-seeking individuals, rather than being stigmatized or treated
with skepticism. As relating to positive psychology, this potential point of
cultural online dating saturation, and the accompanying removal of the
negativity of online dating, means that p eople who are seeking romantic
connections could be able to do so without fear of negative backlash from
friends or family, and instead discuss their online endeavors as equally as
they could their offline romantic endeavors. Being able to be open, have
channels for communication, and not having to hide oneself is a benefit in
all types of relationships—romantic, platonic, familial, or otherwise, online
or offline (Hojjat & Cramer, 2013; Roffey, 2012).
Types and variety of online dating. From their introduction to the
public approximately 20 years ago (Finkel et al., 2012), the supply of online
dating platforms has since developed to respond to a variety of romantic
and sexual demands. There have been a variety of websites and smartphone
applications developed with the intention of providing online dating ser
vices to an equally varied population, including websites like eharmony.com,
okcupid.com, plentyoffish.com, and more. Although the main objective of
most is to provide people with a means with which they can meet and
communicate with potential partners, these platforms and applications do
differ in fairly significant ways.
Eharmony.com offers an online approach to fairly traditional relation-
ships, purporting that it is “making history by creating more meaningful
connections that lead to fulfilling marriages” (eharmony.com). Other online
services can be used by people who want different experiences out of their
online dating, for example, Tinder’s reputation as a “hookup” app or Grindr’s
niche consumer base specifically focusing on gay and bisexual men look-
ing for consensual sexual encounters (grindr.com). This list can go on to
include other services that offer a free version and extra features in their
paid version, thus separating their user base into a more casual or more seri-
ous crowd like okcupid.com, or websites catered specifically to a religious,
racial, or occupational crowd, like christianmingle.com, blackpeoplemeet
.com, or farmersonly.com, respectively. There are even websites for individ-
uals who are already in a relationship and are looking to engage in extrady-
adic affairs, such as ashleymadison.com. The list of niche online dating
platforms can go on to cover most bases of relational, romantic, or sexual
desires. Given the prevalence of online dating in modern culture and the
predominance of desire for interpersonal affiliation, it’s a safe bet to assume
that if t here exists a demand for it, t here is an online dating application to
meet that demand.
Although t hese vast offerings of means to meet other people may seem
daunting, superfluous, or even redundant, they all exist with differing
degrees of success. The existence of so many different types of online dating
applications stands to represent an inclusiveness of all people in the univer-
sal search for love. Given the positive nature of healthy romantic relation-
ships and their positive effects on mental and physical well-being (Hojjat &
Cramer, 2013), this is a very good thing; regardless of who one is or what
one wants, everyone deserves love. W hether it’s sexual, romantic, niche,
traditional, or divergent, however one identifies sexually, racially, reli-
giously, these sites show that there is love for everybody.
MODERN ONLINE DATING

Physical self-presentation. In the offline world, upon meeting an indi-
vidual the physical attractiveness is apparent. A glance can almost instantly
inform of one’s physical attributes, features, complexion, general fitness,
and more. Offline attraction research shows a person’s physical attrac-
tiveness to be a big factor in how much other p eople are attracted to
them (Berscheid & Reis, 1998), and it’s no different in online dating (Hitsch
et al., 2006, 2010). Online, however, there is an added level of complexity
to the presentation of one’s attractiveness. All self-presentation online is
deliberate and can be altered, adding an extra layer of nuance to mate
attraction.
One of the most important aspects of self-presentation in online dating
is posting a picture of oneself. Using photos indisputably increases one’s
chances of connecting with p eople online, and the profiles with photos
are contacted significantly more than the profiles without photos (Hitsch
et al., 2006). But having a pretty face isn’t the only important t hing when it
comes to posting pictures in online dating; typically the impressions one’s
face gives are also very important. For men, this means having pictures
that exude trust, authenticity, and small amounts of warmth and kindness.
For women, attractive faces were the ones that appeared confident and not
self-centered (Fiore, Taylor, Mendelsohn, & Hearst, 2008).
The difficult part is that online, people have the ability to selectively
self-present their best aspects while attempting to hide their less desirable
traits. In fact, data show a relationship between physical appearance and
photogenic self-enhancement such that the less attractive an individual is,
the more likely they are to enhance their self-presentation in online photos
(Toma & Hancock, 2010). This is a big enough issue that the majority of
online daters actually report being concerned that people are misrepre-
senting themselves online (Brym & Lenton, 2001; Gibbs, Ellison, & Heino,
2006; Hancock & Toma, 2009).
Although there is some intentional deception in this process, some of
it includes more subtle ways people attempt to present their best face.
Although online daters might think their photos are an accurate reflection
of themselves, more objective observers can realize that the photos are not
as accurate as t hose who posted them might think (Hancock & Toma, 2009).
The difficulty most online daters face is a balancing act; they are attempt-
ing to present a very attractive image of themselves, but also attempting to
present an honest and accurate image due to anticipated face-to-face meet-

ings. Typically, while trying to balance these possibly conflicting goals,
online daters w ill lean to the side of self-enhancement.
Of course, as with most things, self-presentation online is more nuanced
and complex than posting a pretty picture. Beyond just pictures, what one
says in one’s self-description plays an important role in one’s overall attrac-
tiveness. Like the sex differences associated with pictures, men’s profiles
were seen as more attractive when the text gave the impression of a genu-
ine, trustworthy, and extroverted individual. For women, more attractive
profiles w ere associated with appearing extroverted, feminine, and again,
not self-centered (Fiore et al., 2008).
Verbal self-description. Regarding the actual content of self-descriptions,
to successfully self-present with the eventual goal of meeting face-to-face
offline, data suggest that providing intentional, frequent, and positive self-
disclosures, and a fine amount of honesty as well, are f actors in a success-
ful online dating experience, as determined by finding a partner for dating
(Ellison, Heino, & Gibbs, 2006). This mirrors the research from positive
psychology about honest and positive disclosures being associated with
more positive relationships; in the online world honesty and positivity
are also associated with success. Interestingly enough, however, too much
honesty is not associated with successful self-presentation. This is perhaps
due to higher amounts of honest disclosures being associated with higher
amounts of negative disclosures, for example, character flaws and incom-
patible habits. Another important factor in successful online dating is one’s
experience with online dating; the more one does it, the better one gets at
the online dating balancing act. Unfortunately, self-presentation is a tricky
part of online dating as p eople are known to intentionally or unintention-
ally misrepresent themselves (Hancock & Toma, 2009; Toma & Hancock,
2010; Toma, Hancock, & Ellison, 2008), and everyone is worried that every
one e lse is misrepresenting themselves and are skeptical of how people
actually are (Brym & Lenton, 2001; Gibbs, Ellison, & Heino, 2006).
Like with physical misrepresentation in pictures, some online daters
also misrepresent themselves in their self-descriptions. Research shows
that men who are taller and wealthier are more attractive to women, and
women who are younger and prettier are more attractive to men (Hitsch
et al., 2006). In line with t hese findings, men have been shown to typically
lie about or misrepresent their height, and women have been shown to
lie about or misrepresent their weight (Rudder, 2014a). Furthermore, the
farther p eople are from the stereot ypical ideal, the more likely they are
to lie or misrepresent themselves (Hall, Park, Song, & Cody, 2010; Toma
et al., 2008).
Attraction and mate criteria. There are several f actors that have been
reliably shown to influence interpersonal attraction. Included among these
factors are a partner’s physical attractiveness, similarity, proximity, and

reciprocal attraction to oneself (Berscheid & Reis, 1998; Luo & Zhang, 2009;
Sprecher, 1998). Each of these have different but potent effects on influenc-
ing attraction, that is, some of their effects on attraction are exacerbated
over the length of the relationship, some are attenuated, and some remain
the same. Regardless of how the factors influence attraction, before online
dating these factors were regularly shown to be associated with attraction;
with current research into online dating it appears these factors continue
to be of g reat importance, but in slightly different ways.
Although people can attempt to present an honest (or not) image of
themselves online, they will still have to wade through others’ profiles to
determine if they are attracted to a given potential mate. Research shows
the physical attractiveness of the individual, as determined by their pho-
tos, to be of utmost importance (Ellison, Heino, & Gibbs, 2006; Fiore et al.,
2008). Although necessary, however, pictures of oneself are not the sole
sufficient factor in presenting an attractive online persona; how one describes
oneself is also quite import ant in attracting mates in an online dating
scenario (Fiore et al., 2008). In fact, online daters have been shown to
attend carefully to small, minute details about a given profile to extrapo-
late inferences about the potential match who wrote it, that is, assumptions
about education and intelligence from their writing style, or inferences
about weight from the style and angle of pictures selected (Ellison et al.,
2006).
When it comes to choosing a partner, regardless of how one chooses
to self-present, a potential partner’s physical attractiveness is one of the
most important factors for overall attraction and mate selection (Fiore
et al., 2008; Hitsch et al., 2006, 2010). Unsurprisingly, data have shown
more attractive p eople garner more positive evaluations both spontane-
ously and a fter deliberation than average looking or less attractive indi-
viduals (Sritharan, Heilpern, Wilbur, & Gawronski, 2010). On this aspect
of online dating, obtained results remain consistent with research on
offline attraction and relationships, such that the more attracted someone
is to someone e lse, the more likely they are to want to interact with them
(Berscheid & Reis, 1998). However, surprisingly online daters do not all
flock to the most attractive people on their websites, not always (Rudder,
2014a). A large portion of online daters prefer to interact and date some-
one similar to themselves in terms of physical attractiveness (Fiore &
Donath, 2005).
Although it may seem surprising that all online daters aren’t magneti-
cally attracted to the most physically attractive people on their websites,
it makes sense in the context of the research. Beyond physical attrac-
tion, another one of the f actors that influences one’s choices is how similar
the potential mate is to oneself. This is a well-k nown variable in offline
mate attraction (Berscheid & Reis, 1998; Luo & Klohnen, 2005; McCroskey,
Hamilton, & Weiner, 1974; Morry, 2005), and is strongly mirrored in the
online dating world (Fiore & Donath, 2005; Gibbs et al., 2006; Hitsch
et al., 2010). Across many different domains such as age, weight, race, and
socioeconomic status, p eople look for and prefer o thers who are like
themselves (Hitsch et al., 2010). The same race preference is particularly
strong among online daters, and this preference for racially similar others
is mirrored in nonacademic research; analysis on user trends on the
dating website okcupid.com shows users of this website to also largely
prefer interacting with racially similar others (Rudder, 2014b). Beyond
race, online daters tend to have a preference for others who are similar in
terms of education level, marital status (i.e., single or divorced), religion,
political views, tolerance toward smoking, relationship goals, and more
(Hitsch et al., 2010).
This preference for similar o
thers is capitalized on by online dating com-
panies and websites. Purporting matching based on science (and possibly
backing up that claim, which we’ll never know due to trade secrets and
company confidentiality agreements), online dating offers a new way to
meet and discover a potential partner’s similarity to oneself. Convention-
ally, in offline dating, similarity is ascertained by self-disclosure and part-
ner communication or shared experiences. In online dating one can directly
compare how similar a potential mate is to oneself by analysis of their pro-
file, and some online dating websites offer the additional benefit of observ-
ing how compatible a potential mate is to oneself, sometimes via a match
percentage score (e.g., okcupid.com) or through some other means. Each
online dating website uses a different algorithm to match their clients, but
across multiple major sites the main principle for matching people is how
similar they are on variables that the website believes w ill predict the best
relationship prospects (Finkel et al., 2012).
There are some noted gender differences in attraction and dating in the
offline world; w omen tend to add extra weight to a man’s intelligence, race,
status, and income/earning capacity. Men, on the other hand, are pre-
dominantly attracted to physically attractive, younger w omen (Elliot et al.,
2010; Fisman, Iyengar, Kamenica, & Simonson, 2006, 2008), and these trends
are replicated in online dating (Hitsch et al., 2010). Taking it a step even
further, however, we can see that some gender differences can be exacer-
bated online. With clear descriptions and self-disclosures, p eople can be
more selective about their criteria for a partner that they might not address
otherw ise. For example, it has been shown that w omen tend to be more
selective about their partners as the size of their dating pool increases
(Fisman et al., 2006), and this is reflected online by approaching and mes-
saging behaviors; for example, with a large online dating pool, w omen
are significantly more likely to approach a man with a high income or a
presumably high-earning occupation (Hitsch et al., 2010). Both men and

women have racial preferences such that they’d prefer a partner of the
same race; however, this is significantly more pronounced for women than
men in both offline (Fisman, Iyengar, Kamenica, & Simonson, 2006, 2008)
and online contexts (Hitsch et al., 2010).
OUTCOMES FROM ONLINE DATING

Relationship types. Some relationships develop entirely and exist solely
online; t here is never any physical interaction between any members of the
relationship. For some of these relationships, they deviate from the tradi-
tional progression of a “relationship” in that they are less influenced by some
of the documented f actors of attraction that affect the development of close
relationships, like physical attractiveness or partner proximity; rather they
develop entirely online without regard for the participants’ physical appear-
ance or distance from each other, and exist only in the computer-mediated
communication (CMC) between the partners (Cooper & Sportolari, 1997).
In these relationships the partners describe themselves and discuss any
variety of topics, and this continued interaction is what blossoms into an
online-only relationship.
Unlike a person’s physical attractiveness or location, similarity between
partners remains an important and influential factor in online-only rela-
tionships. Similarity between individuals often serves as a bridge connect-
ing the two regardless of other obstacles (i.e., distance), and b ecause other
influences (i.e., attractiveness) are not as much a factor in an online-only
relationship, p eople can connect with others with whom they might other
wise never connect. Furthermore, regarding the distance between partners,
Cooper and Sportolari (1997) discuss an “electronic propinquity” that sub-
verts any spatial barriers or obstacles. Given that online communication is
largely convenient for both parties, comes at little or no cost, and can be
done from anywhere, the disadvantages of not being able to communicate
face-to-face are somewhat offset by some of the advantages of CMC. This
online communication allows for a sense of personal intimacy between two
people such that it allows ease and comfort into a given relationship with-
out some of the pressures of a face-to-face interaction, that is, worry about
one’s attractiveness. It allows for intimate encounters and discussion while
maintaining personal space (Cooper & Sportolari, 1997).
The online-only nature of some relationships, however, is not the only
type of relational outcome from online connections. P eople certainly do
meet in person after initially meeting online, and thereafter these relation-
ships can take the form of more widely known relationships associated
with offline connections, that is, traditional or nontraditional romantic or
sexual relationships (Couch & Liamputtong, 2008; Gibbs et al., 2006; Hitsch
et al., 2006). The form t hese online to offline connections take are entirely
dependent on the partners within the relationship, and vary in accordance
with their relational goals and desires; there is no specific form online rela-
tionships take. Nor is there any specific or singular way to transition from
an online to an offline relationship, but there are some overarching themes
associated with this transition.
Transition from online to offline. With so many p eople using online
dating to meet o thers and a stringent minefield to navigate for success, the
effects of online dating on one’s offline relational status remains in ques-
tion. Couch and Liamputtong (2008) conducted a small group analysis of
online daters on their endeavors online. When asked why they participated
in online dating, the responses varied from looking for a soulmate, for sex,
for fun, to ease boredom, or to meet new people. Similar to other research
(Hitsch et al., 2010; Toma & Hancock, 2010), the emphasis of physical attrac-
tiveness was at the top of most users’ criteria for meeting with a partner,
and online daters in this study noted the worst part of online dating to be
the general misrepresentation of other users in their self-presentation, spe-
cifically with misleading pictures. This study, however, added the extra com-
ponent of assessing online daters’ results from a ctual dating.
For t hose relationships that do develop into relationships of a physical,
offline nature, there is a bit of a process for this transition. After connect-
ing with someone online, participants varied in their particular catalysts
for meeting someone in real life. For some, this involved developing a rap-
port with their partner, having a m ental attraction, or just being willing to
have sex. The meetings themselves w ere equally as varied in their substance;
some participants formed long-term dating relationships, some created
ongoing sexual relationships, and some had sexual encounters once and
then moved on. The specific outcomes of each meeting are entirely depen-
dent on what the online daters determine them to be, varying according to
their desires and objectives (Couch & Liamputtong, 2008).
Relational intimacy and satisfaction. Researchers have sought to com-
pare the diverse array of online relationship types to t hose formed in tradi-
tional face-to-face contexts. Research on online-only relationships, wherein
the partners only communicate online and never in person, sheds some
light on how the CMC nature of an online relationship differs from an offline
one. Anderson and Emmers-Sommer (2006) surveyed individuals who had
only engaged in CMC in their relationships; they found that relationship
satisfaction was built on intimacy, trust, and communication satisfaction
similar to offline relationships, but online relationship satisfaction was also
influenced by f uture expectations of the nature of the CMC relationship,
that is, its transition to an offline one. Communication satisfaction was
particularly important in CMC relationships, as partners do not engage
in typical face-to-face (FTF) relational activities (e.g., g oing out, observing

facial/body expressions). Ergo, attendance to one’s verbal and textual state-
ments and cues online greatly influenced relationship satisfaction, in terms
of both quantity and quality. This extra weight added to attendance to tex-
tual communication is further enhanced by the fact that in CMC relation-
ships partners have the opportunity to explicitly design, craft, and edit their
communication to reflect particular messages, thus reinforcing their per-
sona and allowing their partners to attend to specific cues (Anderson &
Emmers-Sommer, 2006).
Concerning relational intimacy, research has also examined the levels of
intimacy in computer-mediated romantic relationships and compared them
to those of offline face-to-face relationships. Although each relationship can
vary widely in levels of intimacy, in an analysis of individuals who engaged
in both computer-based and offline FTF relationships, participants report
higher levels of intimacy in their FTF relationships. This same pattern was
found when comparing p eople who engaged in CMC relationships against
individuals who only engaged in traditional offline FTF relationships; the
computer-only relationships scored lower in intimacy than the offline ones
(Scott, Mottarella, & Lavooy, 2006).
Differences from offline dating. There are some major differences
between online and offline dating in both processes of dating and out-
comes; for example, in comparison to offline relationships, online dating
can provide quantifiable data regarding one’s relationship in terms of com-
patibility (i.e., a “match percentage” telling how compatible two potential
partners are according to a website’s matching algorithm). Another pro
cess difference between online and offline dating includes a more static
guideline for the online courting process. Although offline dating can
occur spontaneously and take any number of forms, online dating typi-
cally follows a general process: seeking information about online dating,
registering for it, creating some sort of online profile, browsing others’
profiles, contacting o thers and communicating with them, agreeing to
meet face-to-face, and thereafter developing an offline relationship (Finkel
et al., 2012).
Yet another difference lies in the information-sharing aspect of online
dating; although partners traditionally self-disclose directly to one another,
typically in response to a contextual prompting, online dating generally has
users fill out some sort of profile that places information about oneself out
in the public eye for potential matches to read before even initiating com-
munication. The information can vary wildly from person to person; it can be
very general or very specific, and can contain very private content—things
that one might not normally disclose until later into a close relationship
with a significant other. Finally, online dating offers more conven ience;
it allows access to a wider pool of potential partners, various ways with
which one can communicate and interact with said partners, and the ease
of being able to do so on one’s own time. These factors converge to afford
the online dater a major benefit compared to the traditional offline dater.
Although the technical aspects of the relationship initiation process
may differ in an online realm from an offline one, the nature of relation-
ship intimacy is seemingly less affected. Aside from the creation of online
relationships wherein the relationship partners only communicate online
and never interact face-to-face, online relationships typically lead into
myriad forms conventional offline relationships can take. How and what
type of offline relationship an online relationship develops into is entirely
dependent on the relationship partner’s goals and objectives, but t hese are
not vastly different from extant offline relationships.
Online dating risks. Unfortunately, online dating is not without its
share of risks. Beyond the documented deceit surrounding self-presentation
(Ellison et al., 2006; Toma & Hancock, 2010), online dating puts p eople at
risk through a variety of other means, that is, by having them post personal
information on publicly accessible websites, potentially exposing users to
harm via defamation or personal information getting out in the event of
a security breach. A prime example of this is the hacking and leaking of
online dating site ashleymadison.com. Ashleymadison.com is a dating web-
site advertising to its users to “indulge in a discreet encounter,” typically
specializing in extramarital affairs. In July 2015 their security was breached
and the information of the users was used as blackmail in an attempt to
shut the site down, and ultimately the users’ identities w ere made publicly
available, resulting in widespread backlash on individual levels (i.e., resig-
nations, suicides).
On a more individual scale, other risks associated with online dating
include personal harm and grievous injury. From its inception, online dat-
ing has been surrounded by negativity regarding the safety of meeting
strangers over the Internet. The reality of this fear is exemplified in the case
of Maria Korp, an Australian woman who was strangled and subsequently
died as a result of her meeting someone from an online dating website
(Couch, Liamputtong, & Pitts, 2011). Another risk associated with online dat-
ing is falling for scams; p eople sometimes can be scammed and entrapped
via fake profiles and can be extorted into giving up valuables or d oing things
they would not otherwise do. Despite its growing popularity, acceptance,
and use, online dating is still not without its risks.
As online dating becomes more popular and more online daters become
knowledgeable about the risks associated with online dating, they begin to
employ methods of reducing the known associated risks. These can include
limiting the information shared online or using multiple methods to verify
the authenticity of the partners to whom they are speaking (e.g. chatting
across multiple platforms, using webcams). Moreover, some online daters
have been known to research their partners online through a search

engine or even run official background checks on their potential partners
to assess their veracity. When choosing to meet up with someone online,
some online daters elect to meet in crowded, public places to ensure their
safety and attenuate the possibility of meeting someone in person and being
attacked.
FUTURE RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES

Unlike newspaper ads for singles, matchmaking, and other attempted
forms of starting relationships, online dating has successfully gone from
a stigmatized, embarrassing, secret method of meeting o thers to a widely
popular method of exiting singlehood and starting a relationship and
an integral aspect of many p eople’s lives (Finkel et al., 2012). Although
the technical aspects can differ wildly in terms of self-presentation, self-
disclosure, matching compatibility, actually meeting potential partners
and more, in terms of outcomes it’s not so different from conventional
offline dating.
Given that online dating seems to be the next step in romantic inter-
personal interactions as aided by computers, it merits further study as it
becomes increasingly integrated into mainstream culture. Extant research
has examined many facets of online dating; t hose who use it, the different
inputs and outcomes of online dating applications, some psychological pro
cesses that go on in the online dating realm, etc. But maybe most impor-
tantly for our purpose is the question: What roles can positive psychology
play in understanding romantic relationships online?
How might we define a positive relationship online, what are some posi-
tive characteristics and experiences of such relationships, and what are the
antecedents and consequences of positive online romantic relationships?
What interpersonal processes help strengthen the quality and integrity of
online relationships? What are the implications for long-distance relation-
ships including transnational relationships wherein relationships that began
online do not transform into conventional face-to-face relationships for a
long period of time? Now that it has been clearly established that online
relationships are a large part of modern living and are expected to become
even more commonplace in the years ahead, we encourage positive psychol
ogy researchers to consider turning their attention to better understand its
nature and how to promote and improve positive romantic relationships
online. Applications of positive psychology theory and research to this new
understudied phenomenon in modern societies, romantic online relation-
ships, may hold g reat promise in improving romantic relationships being
formed and at least partially maintained online.
REFERENCES
Anderson, T. L., & Emmers-Sommer, T. M. (2006). Predictors of relationship sat-
isfaction in online romantic relationships. Communication Studies, 57(2),
153–172.
Berscheid, E., & Reis, H. T. (1998). Attraction and close relationships. In D. Gil-
bert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 193–
281). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Brym, R. J., & Lenton, R. L. (2001, February 6). Love online: A report on digital dat-
ing in Canada. Retrieved August 8, 2017, from http://projects.chass.utoronto
.ca/brym/loveonline.pdf
Cooper, A., & Sportolari, L. (1997). Romance in cyberspace: Understanding online
attraction. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 22(1), 7–14.
Couch, D., & Liamputtong, P. (2008). Online dating and mating: The use of the
internet to meet sexual partners. Qualitative Health Research, 18(2),
268–279.
Couch, D., Liamputtong, P., & Pitts, M. (2011). Online daters and the use of tech-
nology for surveillance and risk management. International Journal of
Emerging Technologies and Society, 9(2), 116.
DePaulo, B. M., & Morris, W. L. (2006). The unrecognized stereotyping and dis-
crimination against singles. Current Directions in Psychological Science,
15(5), 251–254.
Elliot, A. J., Niesta Kayser, D., Greitemeyer, T., Lichtenfeld, S., Gramzow, R. H.,
Maier, M. A., & Liu, H. (2010). Red, rank, and romance in women viewing
men. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(3), 399.
Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online:
Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 415–441.
Finkel, E. J., Eastwick, P. W., Karney, B. R., Reis, H. T., & Sprecher, S. (2012). Online
dating a critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psy-
chological Science in the Public Interest, 13(1), 3–66.
Fiore, A. T., & Donath, J. S. (2005). Homophily in online dating: When do you like
someone like yourself? Computer Human Interaction, 2005, 1371–1374.
Fiore, A. T., Taylor, L. S., Mendelsohn, G. A., & Hearst, M. (2008, April). Assessing
attractiveness in online dating profiles. In Proceedings of computer-human
interaction (pp. 797–806). New York: ACM Press.
Fisman, R., Iyengar, S. S., Kamenica, E., & Simonson, I. (2006). Gender differences
in mate selection: Evidence from a speed dating experiment. The Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 121(2), 673–697.
Fisman, R., Iyengar, S. S., Kamenica, E., & Simonson, I. (2008). Racial preferences
in dating. The Review of Economic Studies, 75(1), 117–132.
Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Heino, R. D. (2006). Self-presentation in online per-
sonals: The role of anticipated f uture interaction, self-disclosure, and per-
ceived success in Internet dating. Communication Research, 33(2), 152–177.
Hall, J. A., Park, N., Song, H., & Cody, M. J. (2010). Strategic misrepresentation in
online dating: The effects of gender, self-monitoring, and personality traits.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(1), 117–135.
Hancock, J. T., & Toma, C. L. (2009). Putting your best face forward: The accuracy
of online dating photographs. Journal of Communication, 59(2), 367–386.
Hitsch, G. J., Hortaçsu, A., & Ariely, D. (2006). What makes you click? Mate prefer-
ences and matching outcomes in online dating. MIT Sloan Research Paper
No. 4603-06.
Hitsch, G. J., Hortaçsu, A., & Ariely, D. (2010). What makes you click? Mate pref-
erences in online dating. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 8(4),
393–427.
Hojjat, M., & Cramer, D. (Eds.). (2013). Positive psychology of love. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Luo, S., & Klohnen, E. C. (2005). Assortative mating and marital quality in newly-
weds: A couple-centered approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psy
chology, 88(2), 304.
Luo, S., & Zhang, G. (2009). What leads to romantic attraction: Similarity, reci-
procity, security, or beauty? Evidence from a speed-dating study. Journal of
Personality, 77(4), 933–964.
McCroskey, J. C., Hamilton, P. R., & Weiner, A. N. (1974). The effect of interaction
behavior on source credibility, homophily, and interpersonal attraction.
Human Communication Research, 1(1), 42–52.
Morry, M. M. (2005). Relationship satisfaction as a predictor of similarity ratings:
A test of the attraction-similarity hypothesis. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 22(4), 561–584.
Roffey, S. (Ed.). (2012). Positive relationships: Evidence based practice across the
world. New York: Springer.
Rudder, C. (2014a). Dataclysm: Love, sex, race, and identity—what our online lives
tell us about our offline selves. New York: Broadway Books.
Rudder, C. (2014b). Race and attraction, 2009–2014. Retrieved May 28, 2015, from
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/race-attraction-2009-2014
Scott, V. M., Mottarella, K. E., & Lavooy, M. J. (2006). Does virtual intimacy exist?
A brief exploration into reported levels of intimacy in online relationships.
CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(6), 759–761.
Smith, A., & Duggan, M. (2013). Online dating & relationships. Pew Internet &
American Life Project.
Sprecher, S. (1998). Insiders’ perspectives on reasons for attraction to a close other.
Social Psychology Quarterly, 61, 287–300.
Sritharan, R., Heilpern, K., Wilbur, C. J., & Gawronski, B. (2010). I think I like you:
Spontaneous and deliberate evaluations of potential romantic partners in
an online dating context. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(6),
1062–1077.
Toma, C. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2010). Looks and lies: The role of physical attractive-
ness in online dating self-presentation and deception. Communication
Research, 37(3), 335–351.
Toma, C. L., Hancock, J. T., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating fact from fiction:
An examination of deceptive self-presentation in online dating profiles. Per-
sonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1023–1036.
Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007). Who visits online dating sites? Exploring some
characteristics of online daters. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(6), 849–852.
6
Positive Relationships at Work
in Early Childhood Education
Anne Douglass
INTRODUCTION
Positive relationships are the foundation for effective educational practice.
In early childhood education, these relationships are crucial. Young children
learn through relationships and in the context of trust and attachment with
caregivers and teachers. Caring relationships between young children and
their teachers are a key element of high-quality early childhood education.
For this reason, early childhood research and practice focus heavily on the
teacher-child relationship. Much less attention has been given to the adult
relationships in early childhood education settings. Yet adult relationships
are arguably of equal importance. They contribute to the relational orga
nizational culture and climate in early childhood programs that can exert
a powerful influence on teacher-child relationships. Th ese adult relation-
ships include those among teachers, administrators, and other profession-
als, as well as relationships between parents and teachers. For example,
when relationships between teachers and administrators are consistently
strained or disrespectful, this can interfere with teachers’ capacity to estab-
lish nurturing and respectful relationships with the c hildren and parents
they serve. In an organizational system, the relationships at each level exert
influence on relationships at other levels. Research suggests that positive
93
workplace relationships have many benefits, ranging from improved orga

nizational performance to employee well-being and enhanced client or cus-
tomer outcomes and satisfaction.
This chapter examines research on positive relationships among adults
in early childhood education settings, and how those relationships may
influence the quality of early learning programs and their impact on
children. Positive organizational scholarship (POS) offers an important lens
for this newer line of research on adult relationships in early education con-
texts (Cameron, 2008; Cameron & Spreitzer, 2012; Caza & Caza, 2008;
Quinn & Wellman, 2012). POS seeks out and examines positive patterns
of organi zing and interrelating that “arise from, and result in, life-g iving
dynamics, optimal functioning, or enhanced capabilities or strengths”
(Dutton & Glynn, 2008, p. 693). The POS lens is important b ecause it helps
us understand why adult and workplace relationships matter for early edu-
cation, and how these relationships influence teaching practices and out-
comes for c hildren. POS frameworks, insights, and methods are only just
beginning to find their way into the early childhood research, making this
a new frontier for both POS and early education research.
This chapter begins with a description of the early childhood education
context and two current issues of importance in early education research
today: parent-teacher partnerships and systems change. Next, I present
current research applying a POS lens to t hese issues, with a focus on posi-
tive relationships at work and positive change. The chapter concludes with
f uture directions and applications of POS research in the early childhood
education context.
BACKGROUND: CONTEXT AND CURRENT ISSUES IN EARLY

CHILDHOOD EDUCATION RESEARCH
The Early Childhood Education Context
High-quality early childhood education is increasingly recognized as the
foundation for children’s success in school and in life. Investments in qual-
ity early education offer society an eight dollar return for every dollar
invested (Heckman, 2012). Almost three-quarters of all brain development
occurs during the first five years of life. Early education settings play a crit-
ical role in these early years, especially now that the majority of children
under 5 in the United States attend early childhood education programs
prior to kindergarten entry. This translates to over 11 million c hildren u
nder
5, who are cared for each week by over 2 million early educators in a wide
variety of early education settings such as home-based (family) child care
programs, child care centers and preschools, Head Start, and public school
preschool programs (https://w ww.naeyc.org/policy/advocacy/ECWorkforce
Positive Relationships at Work in Early Childhood Education 95
Facts). The early childhood education sector employs more educators than
the K–12 education system in the United States. Early childhood educators
comprise 30 percent of the entire U.S. instructional workforce from early
childhood to postsecondary education (Institute of Medicine and Nation
Research Council, 2012). They are the most racially, ethnically, and lin-
guistically diverse sector of the education workforce for birth to postsec-
ondary (Institute of Medicine and Nation Research Council, 2012).
Growing awareness of this critical early developmental period in life has
prompted increased attention in research and policy to improving the qual-
ity of early childhood education and its workforce. Research shows that
quality in early childhood education programs is mostly mediocre, with
only about 10 percent rated as high quality (National Institute of Child
Health and H uman Development, 2006). Learning how to effectively
improve quality is therefore an urgent priority. Early childhood education
research examines a wide range of approaches and methods for improv-
ing the quality of early education programs and professionalizing its
workforce.
In the next section, I define two current issues in early childhood educa-
tion quality, present an overview of the relevant research, and discuss how
POS perspectives and research can enrich and extend the research on these
issues. Research that can inform improvement in early childhood educa-
tion is urgently needed to ensure that all children have access to high-
quality programs that help prepare them for success in school and in life.
Research on Early Childhood Education: Parent-Teacher

Partnerships and Systems Change
Improving Parent-Teacher Partnerships
Quality in early childhood education is defined by a set of professional
standards, for which a variety of research measures have been developed.
These professional standards and accompanying research measures focus
on core domains of quality such as administrative practices and staff qual-
ifications, teacher-child interactions, curriculum and assessment, health
and safety, and f amily engagement.
In this chapter, I focus on one of these domains of quality, family engage-
ment, and the research that examines efforts to improve parent-teacher
partnerships. Parent-teacher partnerships are defined as positive relation-
ships of shared power and mutual respect that are reciprocal, responsive,
and caring (Douglass & Klerman, 2012; Dunst, 2002). Nel Noddings, an
educational philosopher, defines caring as a relationship that involves
exchange and dialogue, a reciprocal relationship characterized by a “shared
control” that involves both the carer and the cared for (2002, p. 14).
Embedded within this definition of caring is a concern and responsiveness

to another, as well as the respect associated with “shared control.” Caring
is at the heart of early educators’ relationships with families as well as with
children.
Family engagement has been widely touted as a key strategy to close the
“school readiness gap” (Kagan & Rigby, 2003). The call to engage, involve,
and partner with families appears in public policies, professional standards,
and research. The rationale behind this broad mandate is a strong body of
evidence showing that these partnerships are associated with positive out-
comes for c hildren and families (Halgunseth, Peterson, Stark, & Moodie,
2009). Broadly defined, family engagement refers to reciprocal partner-
ships between families and early education programs that are focused on
supporting children’s healthy development (Douglass, 2016). Although
partnering with families is widely considered a core component of quality,
many studies paint a discouraging picture of parent-teacher relationship
quality in early education programs. Studies have shown a gap between the
desire of early education programs to support families and actual practice
with families (McWilliam, McMillen, Sloper, & McMillen, 1997). Research
points to several common barriers to parent-teacher relationships, includ-
ing time constraints, competing priorities, negative attitudes of teachers
toward parents, parents’ beliefs about teachers, and a lack of cultural com-
petence (Bernhard, 1998; Burton, 1992; Horm, 2003; Keyes, 2002; Zhou,
2003; Souto-Manning & Swick, 2006; Takanishi, 2004; McWilliam et al.,
1997). Studies of aspiring teachers reveal that many expect conflict, criti-
cism, and tension in their relationships with parents (Baum & McMurray-
Schwarz, 2004). Translating the mandate for family partnerships into action
at the program level has fallen into what has been called a “rhetoric rut”
(Harvard Family Research Project, 2000). According to Rusher and Ware
(1998), early education program relationships with families may be the
weakest component of the overall movement t oward quality.
One reason for this slow progress may be the limitations of the dominant
approach to improving quality. Efforts to improve this, and other, dimen-
sions of quality typically focus on teacher training (Baum & McMurray-
Schwarz, 2004). This often involves intervening at the individual teacher
level, with training workshops, formal coursework, and sometimes the use
of consultants or coaches to support application of new knowledge to pro-
fessional practices (Ackerman, 2008). Similar individually oriented train-
ing approaches appear in the health care research. Hemmelgarn, Glisson
and Dukes (2001) studied family-centered health care, and found that most
studies
focused on the characteristics of individual health care providers. The

assumption of t hese studies is that the extent to which any component of
FCC [family-centered care] is emphasized in a particu lar medical setting is

primarily a function of the training, experience, and orientation of the indi-
vidual provider. (p. 94)
ese approaches fail to consider the relational context in which profession-
Th
als work. Research on improving professional practices suggests that a reli-
ance on individual training alone may neglect key underlying relational,
organizational, and/or systemic barriers to f amily engagement (Bromer &
Henly, 2004; Eaton, 2000; Hemmelgarn et al., 2001; Winton & McCollum,
2008). In addition, early care and education is undergoing a rapid transfor-
mation toward increasing standardization. As early education has gained
recognition as one of the most cost effective social investments, t here has
been a move to standardize practice, heighten accountability, and profession-
alize the workforce, in order to improve child outcomes and school readi-
ness. The increasingly bureaucratic context of early childhood education may
reinforce a form of professionalism that views caring and collaborative rela-
tionships as unprofessional.
Parent-Teacher Partnerships: Connections to POS Perspectives

POS offers a new lens for investigating the quality of parent-teacher part-
nerships. The POS lens enables researchers to look beyond just the indi-
vidual teacher, making visible the relational and organizational dynamics
that might influence teacher practices. Positive relationships at work have
been associated with many desirable outcomes, including quality out-
comes and professional-client partnerships. Relational coordination theory,
and the evidence that supports it, explains how positive relationships
help p eople do their work better, particularly when that work involves
people in different roles working together. Relational coordination theory
and research suggest that relationships of mutual respect, shared goals, and
shared knowledge drive organ izational effectiveness and outcomes, and
that specific organizational structures can enable t hese positive relation-
ships to be spread and sustained throughout an organization (Gittell,
2016). This theory suggests that formal organizations can be structured in
ways that promote, enhance, and sustain relationships, rather than con-
strain them.
Relational coordination consists of positive relationships and high-
quality communication. Positive relationships are defined as having the
following characteristics: mutual respect, shared goals, and shared knowl-
edge. Shared goals refer to a broader goal shared by employees across dif
ferent roles within the organization. Shared knowledge refers to the shared
understanding about how one another’s specific work or role interrelates
with the work of others and the organization as a whole. Mutual respect
refers to each organizational members’ respect for one another, regardless

of role or status hierarchies within the organization. With relational coor-
dination, we respect and understand the work of o thers, and the ways in
which everyone’s roles contribute to the organization. Th ese relationships
are not so much about being “friends,” but instead are about the qualities
of the work-based relationships among organizational members across all
roles and levels within the organization. These positive relationships rein-
force, and are reinforced by, high-quality communication, which is defined
as frequent, timely, accurate, and focused on problem solving rather than
blaming.
Relational coordination theory identifies a set of organizational policies
and structures that are needed to support and sustain positive relationships
and high-quality communication. These structures include hiring for rela-
tional competencies, routines that bring p eople together across roles to
communicate with one another, measurement and reward systems based
on the perform ance of teams or units across different functions, and
problem-solving and conflict resolution protocols. Th ese structures consti-
tute a relational work system that strengthens and reinforces relational
processes throughout the organization.
Based on research across many industries and sectors (including the air-
line industry, health care, and human services), relational coordination has
been shown to drive performance outcomes. Simply put, teams and organ
izations with t hese positive relationships get better outcomes—they are
more effective when it comes to change and improvement, they are more
resilient, and p
eople who work t here are more satisfied and turn over less
often. Th
ese positive relationships across organizations have also been
associated with client satisfaction and positive professional-client part-
nerships. Gittell (2002) has shown how strong relationships among health
care providers improved provider-client relationships by creating a more
coordinated experience for the client with the organization. She explains,
“[r]elationships of shared goals, shared knowledge, and mutual respect
between providers facilitate the coordination of customer service by help-
ing providers to achieve a more unified, consistent interface with the cus-
tomers they collectively serve” (Gittell, 2002, p. 309). She describes how this
relational coordination improves performance, particularly in settings that
require responsive and improvised responses to clients, a setting similar to
that of parent-teacher partnerships in early education settings.
Relational coordination theory explains how relationships influence
orga nizational perfor
mance and outcomes, including orga nizational
improvement and professional-client relationships. When we overlook the
influence of relationships, and fail to make change in ways that strengthen
relationships, we are far less likely to achieve the desired organizational
outcomes.
Systems Change and Reform in Early Childhood Education

The second issue of focus in this chapter is systems change in early child-
hood education. Research on early education quality highlights the urgent
need to improve working conditions, retain diverse talent, and build sup-
portive systems that enable early education programs to achieve and sus-
tain high quality. Major efforts are u nder way across the country and the
globe to reform early education systems and policies to strengthen the
workforce and improve quality (Cameron, Mooney, & Moss, 2002; Gold-
stein, 2007; Kagan & Kauerz, 2012; MacFarlane & Lewis, 2012; Wood &
Bennett, 2000). Many U.S. states are implementing reforms to improve
quality, such as early learning standards, coordinated professional develop-
ment systems, and quality rating and improvement systems (QRIS) (Hyson &
Whittaker, 2012; LaMoine, 2008; National Professional Development Center
on Inclusion, 2008; Ochshorn, 2011; Schaack, Tarrant, Boller & Tout, 2012;
Stoney, Mitchell, & Warner, 2006; Tout, Metz, & Bartley, 2013).
These reforms can have an impact on the day-to-day work of early edu-
cators. For example, in many states, early childhood educators must adopt
new evidence-based curricula or child assessment measures, apply new learn-
ing standards, earn a college degree to keep their job, or strengthen partner-
ships with families (Apple & McMullen, 2007; Douglass, 2011; Douglass &
Klerman, 2012; Durlak, 2010; Fixsen et al., 2005; Goldstein, 2007; Leana &
Barry, 2000; Metz, Halle, Bartley & Blasberg, 2013). Changes of this mag-
nitude are widely considered to be significant stressors (Cameron, 2008).
Early educators can find themselves overwhelmed or in conflict with the
number, magnitude, timing, and sometimes even the purpose of the changes
currently impacting the field, which are often not accompanied by ade-
quate resources (Apple & McMullen, 2007; Douglass & Klerman, 2012;
Goldstein, 2007, Satkowski, 2009).
The change process, especially when driven by external pressures, is
widely considered challenging. Across many sectors, the organizational and
systems change literature is filled with stories of barriers and resistance to
change. Similarly, much of the early education research on systems change
focuses on the challenges, failures, stressors, and barriers that can be so
apparent during a change process. For example, Goldstein (2007) and
Gordon and Patterson (2008) write about tensions in the change process,
and MacFarlane (2012) and Satkowski (2009) address divisions and frag-
mentation in change. The dominant focus on challenges typically fails to
capture the ways that p eople handle change in positive, agentic, or adaptive
ways (Cameron, 2008; Cooperrider & Godwin, 2012). POS scholars have
argued that this dominant research perspective can overlook positive acts of
change that may offer new insights about ways to improve change outcomes
(Cameron, 2008; Cooperrider & Godwin, 2012).
Early Education Systems Change: Connections

to POS Perspectives
The POS perspective enables us to focus on collective resilience and the
ways that individuals and groups positively contribute to change efforts.
Collective resilience refers to the collective capacity to thrive or flourish
under adverse conditions (Gittell, 2008; Sutcliffe & Vogus, 2003). The posi-
tive lens brings this collective resilience into focus, and thus can broaden
the understanding of change processes and how they might be designed to
be most effective. POS seeks out t hese positive patterns of organizing and
interrelating (Cameron, 2008; Cameron & Spreitzer, 2012; Caza & Caza,
2008; Quinn & Wellman, 2012). The positive change literature examines
acts of change that are resilient, creative, hopeful, energizing, and capacity
building. In the context of change, the positive lens focuses on “how change
processes enable (or not) the development of p eople and local capability”
(Golden-Biddle & Mao, 2012, p. 764). This lens exposes positive acts that
help people navigate the change process, move the process forward, and
strengthen people in change. The use of this perspective can reveal collec-
tive resilience, the positive and adaptive capabilities and leadership of those
involved in change, to emerge and be seen. Innovation, high performance,
and advancing early education quality require these strengths and capabili-
ties. This makes positive change research particularly relevant for real-
world application in sectors such as early education that are experiencing
major reforms.
POS researchers have begun to explore how positive change processes
result in improved outcomes for change. Negative change processes are typ-
ically characterized by resistance and maladaptation. In contrast, positive
change is characterized by resilience, intellectual complexity, knowledge
creation, creativity, productivity, and hope (Cameron, 2008). Strong and
resilient p
eople and systems have more energy to contribute to a successful
change effort, resulting in improved outcomes.
Relational coordination theory offers further insights about resilience in
change. Especially in uncertain or unpredictable environments, relation-
ships and interconnections among those involved are important. A rela-
tional system enables the development of connections through which
collective resilience occurs. Gittell (2008) shows how relational coordina-
tion enables p eople in organizations or systems to respond in resilient ways
to external pressures for change.
Dutton and Glynn (2008) theorize about how positive processes may
result in desired outcomes such as enhanced performance and capabilities.
They identify three key mechanisms: positive emoting, which is defined as
the felt experience of positive emotions; positive interrelating, which refers
to interactions where the participants experience their connection as
mutual, trusting, respectful, or other high-quality relationship attributes;

and positive meaning-making, which is the “processes in which p eople
imbue stimuli with significance, implications, and consequences that imply
something is good, desirable or beneficial in some way” (Dutton & Glynn,
2008, p. 701). These processes cultivate strengths and capabilities, result-
ing in more optimal functioning and outcomes.
POS offers new perspectives and approaches to the study of key issues in
early childhood education research. Relational coordination, relational
bureaucracy, and positive change approaches illuminate otherwise invisi-
ble processes that exert enormous influence on organizational and systems
outcomes.
In the next section, I present several studies that have applied a POS lens
to the current issues in early childhood research described above. These
include studies testing the theory of relational bureaucracy for parent-
teacher partnership quality and organizational improvement, and a study
of early childhood education systems change that adopted a positive change
lens to explore collective resilience.
POSITIVE PERSPECTIVES IN EARLY CHILDHOOD

EDUCATION RESEARCH
Relational Bureaucracy and Relational Coordination
As described above, most studies of parent-teacher partnerships in early
childhood education have focused on the training of individual teachers.
What if we examined parent-teacher partnerships by looking not only at
teacher training interventions, but also at the workplace context and its
relationships, structures, and processes? In this section, I present current
research that applies relational coordination and relational bureaucracy
theory to the study of parent-teacher partnerships and efforts to improve
quality.
Parent-Teacher Partnerships
Relational bureaucracy theory helps us understand one of t oday’s big
questions in early education and other human services sectors (Douglass &
Gittell, 2012; Gittell & Douglass, 2012). How formal organizations pre-
serve and promote caring professional practices is a key challenge in the
increasingly standardized world of care and education today. Although the
standardization movement may help professionalize fields such as early
childhood education, it also can have unintended negative consequences for
family-centered relational practices. In professional organizational settings,
t hings like sharing power with families or being caring and responsive, can
be seen as unprofessional. When this happens, it can act as a barrier to posi-
tive parent-teacher partnerships.
Douglass and Gittell (2012) explore a hybrid organizational form that
blends the best of formal structures and accountability with the core pro-
fessional competencies of caring, respect, and responsive practices with
children and parents. Theory and research on alternative, or hybrid, orga
nizational forms offers insight into how organizations might support and
promote caring and relationship-based work with families. Th ese hybrid
forms and models seek to capitalize on caring, trust, cultural competence,
and relationships (Goode & Jones, 2007; Heckscher & Adler, 2006). They
offer alternatives to bureaucracy and its weaknesses.
The Bureaucratic Organizational Form

In Weber’s “ideal” bureaucratic organization, formal procedures and sci-
entific rationality drive efficient operations (Fischer & Sirianni, 1984;
Weber, 1984). Workers have clearly defined roles and responsibilities
within a hierarchical structure, and they treat clients predictably by virtue
of these rules and the mandated impersonality of relationships. Despite
the common negative association of bureaucracy with “red tape,” bureau-
cratic organizational structures can support a healthy work environment
that functions efficiently, smoothly, and equitably. However, problems
arise when bureaucratic structures and practices of early education pro-
grams interfere with f amily partnerships and act as a barrier to caring. This
occurs in two primary ways: (1) by discouraging caring and the use of feel-
ings or individual circumstances to guide decisions and actions, and (2) by
positioning the professional as the expert with power over the parent or
client.
Theories about care work within formal organizations argue that con-
ventional bureaucratic structures and professional culture discourage car-
ing and relational work practices (Cancian, 2000; Fitz Gibbon, 2002). Caring
violates the conventional bureaucratic norms of impartiality, standard-
ization of services, professional distance from clients, and professionally
held expert knowledge (Adler, Kwon, & Heckscher, 2008; Morgaine, 1999;
Osgood, 2006; Sykes, 1991; Waerness, 1996). In this context, caring can be
perceived as unprofessional, a sign of breaking the rules of fairness and
detachment (Bromer & Henly, 2004; Fletcher, 1999; Noddings, 1990). Car-
ing involves making a judgment about the best course of action to take in a
given situation, often based on personal knowledge rather than scientific
knowledge. In practice, teachers often believe that they must give up car-
ing to become professional (Douglass, 2011).
Intentionally or unintentionally, organizations structure relationships

among their members. Relationships can be constrained or limited, or they
can be cultivated and spread across many levels. For example, bureaucratic
organizations structure power relations in ways that can work against part-
nerships with families. Their workers are expected to possess specialized
or expert knowledge, and to maintain emotional distance from their clients
(Adler, Kwon, & Heckscher, 2008; Morgaine, 1999; Osgood, 2006; Sykes
1991; Waerness, 1996). Fletcher (1999) writes that the theory of “power
over” that underlies organizational principles of hierarchy conflicts with the
partnership theory of “power with” (p. 33). The possibility that the client
may have knowledge and could make a contribution is not considered, mak-
ing a partnership of shared knowledge and power impossible. This power
imbalance, rooted in the “professional as expert” or “technician” paradigm,
is a barrier to family engagement practices.
The Relational Bureaucratic Hybrid: Leveraging the Positive

Building on relational coordination theory, Douglass and Gittell (2012)
present a relational bureaucratic model that incorporated two key factors
thought to support partnerships and caring in formal organizational con-
texts: (1) leaders who modeled shared power and expertise and (2) orga
nizational processes and structures that supported, valued, and rewarded
caring and responsive relationships. We argued that the relational orga
nizational context is a critical learning environment for teachers, influenc-
ing the extent to which teachers learn to care or not to care.
Table 6.1 shows the theorized characteristics of this relational bureau-
cratic model and contrasts it with the conventional bureaucratic organ
ization (Douglass, 2011). The t able highlights the contrasting dynamics of
power and relationships. Drawing on the conceptual work of Bloom (1991)
and Glisson (2002), these dimensions are presented according to an orga
nizational systems framework that views the organization as a system of
interrelated components that are hypothesized to influence the quality of
parent-teacher partnerships. Th ese organizational systems components are
the people (staff and families), structures for power and relationships within
the organization (policies and procedures), and processes for organization
power and relationships.
Using a multiple case study methodology, we tested the hypothesis that
a relational bureaucratic organization facilitates effective parent-teacher
partnerships, and a conventional bureaucratic organization interferes with
effective parent-teacher partnerships (Douglass, 2011). Four early childhood
education centers w ere selected for the study, two with strong parent-
teacher partnerships and two with weak parent-teacher partnerships.
Table 6.1 Theorized Pattern of Relational and Conventional Bureaucratic

Organizations
Components of Key Dimensions of
Organizational Key Dimensions of Relational Conventional
System Bureaucracy Bureaucracy
1. People Staff reflect the cultures/ Staff may not reflect the
languages of families served cultures/languages of
families served
2. Power Democratic and participatory Hierarchical staff
structures structures structures
3. Relationship Systems exist to support use of Rigid rules, boundaries,
structures relational competencies for and policies exist to
caring, flexible and responsive guide uniform approach
approach to individual needs
4. Processes Opportunities to share Hierarchy of expertise,
related to power knowledge, expertise, and power knowledge, and power
5. Processes Staff relationships are caring, Staff relationships are
related to reciprocal, and respectful. formal, hierarchical, and
relationships Relational competencies are impersonal. Adherence
recognized, valued, and to rules and protocol is
developed recognized and valued
The study found that the centers with weak parent teacher partnerships
ere primarily characterized by conventional bureaucratic systems. The
w
structures and processes in t hese centers created barriers to caring, rela-
tional work practices and positive parent-teacher partnerships. For exam-
ple, we found that in early childhood programs where staff did not feel
respected or valued, staff w ere less likely to develop positive and respect-
ful partnerships with parents. As one teacher explained, “If this center
wants teachers to support families, the center “needs a ‘strengthening
staff’ program. If y ou’re falling apart, you c an’t be helping other p
eople.”
An organizational culture of disrespect for staff was a barrier to family
engagement.
We can gain the greatest insights from the centers with strong parent-
teacher partnerships and which reflected the predicted pattern of a rela-
tional bureaucracy. Th ese programs constitute cases of positive deviance,
defined as positive outliers or uncommon cases of unusually and highly suc-
cessful or effective performance that enables better solutions or outcomes
(Lavine, 2012; Zanetti & Taylor, 2016). These cases are particularly instruc-
tive b
ecause of the potential to learn how to achieve breakthrough outcomes
and spread success more widely. Th ese programs shared several notable
characteristics: (1) modeling caring relationships and shared power, (2) spe-
cific structures that support caring and shared power, and (3) a strong orga
nizational mission to support and strengthen families. Leaders in these
centers modeled positive, caring relationships and shared power in their
interactions with staff and parents. They provided opportunities for teachers
to share in leadership roles. This respect for teachers’ expertise is reflected
in one director’s words, “A lot of staff have been here for years and I really
believe they know their job better than I know their job.” When it came to
figuring out how to improve family engagement practices, this director sup-
ported teachers as the drivers of change. Administrators empowered staff
to resolve their own problems, rather than solving problems for staff.
Caring for one another was evident in t hese relational bureaucratic cen-
ters. Teachers described ways that administrators cared for and respected
them by providing professional development opportunities, release time
from work to attend training, staff appreciation, and being available for sup-
portive supervision. A teacher in one of these programs explained that the
center was the most supportive place she had ever worked, and another
teacher described her supervisor as “inspiring.” One administrator summed
up their approach, saying “We have to look at our employees as families
also. If we d on’t have happy employees, y ou’re not g oing to have a happy
environment.” Staff w ere treated with respect and supported, and teachers
extended that respect to their relationships with families.
One key takeaway from this study is that the relationships staff estab-
lished with one another in the workplace carried over to the work they did
with families. Leaders modeled positive relationships and ways of interact-
ing in the organization, creating a relational culture that aligned with the
kinds of relationships we want with families. The theory of parallel pro
cess helps to explain how this modeling of relationships with staff may
influence relationships between teachers and families. Parallel process
refers to the way in which interactions among one set of p eople within an
organization mirror, or parallel, the interactions among another set of
people. Simply stated, positive supervisor-staff relationships set the tone
for positive staff-family relationships, and vice versa (Parlakian, 2002). The
theory of parallel process suggests that this modeling of partnerships within
the organization carries over into other relationships such as t hose with
families.
The second notable commonality between the programs with strong
parent-teacher partnerships was the use of specific structures and processes
to develop, maintain, and reward relational competencies. In t hese pro-
grams, staff learned how to be both caring and professional. For exam-
ple, directors in both programs used reflective supervision to model
consideration of multiple perspectives in identifying “more than one way”
to solve a problem or interpret a boundary. Reflective supervision is defined
as supportive and collaborative supervision, “characterized by active lis-

tening and thoughtful questioning by both supervisor and supervisee,” and
is “focused on learning from work with families” (Parlakian, 2002). This
facilitated dialogue and a process for solving problems in ways that w ere
responsive to the needs of individual families, rather than a one-size-fits-
all solution. A relational bureaucratic organizational system may serve as a
learning environment in which organizational structures enable staff to
learn how to negotiate boundaries, conflict, decision making, and flexible
and responsive interactions with o thers.
Gittell and Douglass (2012) further elaborated on relational bureaucracy
theory in a paper conceptualizing a relational work system in which formal
structures support caring, reciprocal relationships among organizational
participants. Rather than leaving relationships to chance, caring relation-
ships can be systematically supported and sustained through the design of
an organization’s structures (Gittell & Douglass, 2012). We proposed a
new hybrid organizational form capable of promoting norms of caring
and reciprocal interrelating in the formal organizational context. Relational
bureaucracy integrates the strengths of bureaucracy with the strengths of
the relational organization, by connecting formal organizational struc-
tures with positive relationships. In doing so, it embeds these relationships
within the organizational system in ways that are replicable, scalable, and
sustainable.
Quality Improvement and Relational Bureaucracy

Building on the research described above, I launched a series of studies
to examine how relational coordination and relational bureaucracy con-
tributed to organizational change efforts. One was a study of an initiative
designed to improve the quality of trauma-informed practice in urban early
childhood education programs serving a high percentage of children exposed
to trauma. The intervention was led by one urban city’s public health agency
and was delivered using a quality improvement learning collaborative model
(Institute for Healthcare Improvement, 2004). The six participating early
education programs each established a cross-role improvement team of five
or six people, including a senior administrator, program manager, teacher,
early childhood mental health consultant, and a parent.
The study investigated how t hese teams built organ izational capacity
to improve trauma-informed practice (Douglass, 2017). Relational coordi-
nation theory and research suggest that relationships of mutual respect,
shared goals, and shared knowledge drive organizational improvement and
performance, and that specific organizational structures must be in place
to enable t hese positive relationships to be spread and sustained through-

out an organization. This study tested this hypothesis, using a structured,
qualitative, multiple case study methodology (Yin, 2013).
I conducted in-depth interviews of participants during and a fter the
intervention, observations (of classroom quality and the intervention itself),
and document review. Each of the six participating early education pro-
grams constituted a case in this study. An analytic template was designed
based on the relational coordination theory and research literature. A total
of 48 qualitative interviews with the teachers and other professionals par-
ticipating in the intervention w ere conducted, and observations of 100 team
and intervention meetings w ere recorded and analyzed, along with class-
room quality data from a valid and reliable observational assessment tool.
The early results of this ongoing study highlight how programs built
greater capacity for improvement through positive relationships. Teams
developed a culture of caring, collaborative inquiry, and psychological
safety that enabled them to improve their work (Douglass, 2015; Douglass,
2016; Douglass, 2017). As a result, they w ere better able to (1) coordinate
their work, (2) engage staff at all levels in leading change, and (3) speak up,
experiment, and be creative in solving problems. Teachers reported feeling
empowered and more respected by their peers and their supervisors. As one
teacher explained, “I’ve become a stronger teacher; it’s let me spread my
wings into the project and made me feel strong and that I deserve the same
respect as all involved in this.” Another teacher shared, “I found my voice.”
They began to see how valuable their perspectives were, and others on their
teams respected what they brought to the table.
The cross-role team meeting structure helped facilitate this mutual
respect and leadership from all levels. Prior to this intervention, the pro-
grams involved were not using this cross-role meeting structure. Teachers
were typically assigned to work directly with children all day, with no paid
planning time. A key component of the intervention was to overcome
the barriers to establishing team meeting routines that enabled the posi-
tive relationships that are the foundation for organizational change and
improvement.
Rather than just sending in a coach or providing training, this interven-
tion engaged teams of people from across different levels and roles in the
organization to be the change agents. Teams focused on the outcomes they
wanted to achieve and developed strategies for improving those outcomes.
They tested these strategies and reflected together on their data to see how
their strategies were working. This collaborative learning process is a form
of collective leadership for change that recognized that change involves
pooling the wisdom of different members of the team to co-create better
solutions.
Positive Change in Early Childhood Education Systems

The research on early education reform rarely examines the positive or
agentic ways educators respond to change. The early childhood education
system is experiencing tremendous change. Understanding how to promote
positive systems change processes is therefore an important priority for
early education research. In this section, I present a study that applied a pos-
itive lens to a systems change effort (Douglass, 2014). This study examined
the positive dynamics of change and collective resilience in the implemen-
tation of a new early education professional development system in one U.S.
state. Using theories of relational and positive organizing as a theoretical
and analytic framework, this paper investigated positive change processes,
as well as the structures and relationships that supported them, to under-
stand how they contributed to collective resilience in the implementation
of this new system.
The reforms implemented in the selected state represented a significant
transformation of professional development policy and practice. Early edu-
cation professional development systems oversee and deliver services that
include individualized planning and advising, coaching and mentoring, and
coursework and training to advance professional competencies. In addition,
professional development systems typically include accountability and
monitoring features, as well as professional certification and credentialing
functions. The goals of the reform included establishing new criteria for
approving professional development services, aligning professional devel-
opment serv ices with a new set of state professional competencies, and
implementing a new quality rating and improvement system (QRIS), devel-
oped now in many U.S. states (Kagan & Kauerz, 2012). These reforms reflected
a new national vision for state professional development systems articulated
by the National Center on Child Care Professional Development Systems
and Workforce Initiatives Center (2012). This state also developed a new infra-
structure for delivering these professional development services, moving
from a local delivery model to a more centralized system with regional hubs.
Through a competitive bid process, the state selected an entity from each
region of the state with whom it contracted to implement the new system.
These changes required a major re-orientation in the service design and
delivery process.
The study of the overall implementation of this reform included a sub-
study focused on positive change. Two research questions guided this
sub-study: (1) in what ways w ere positive processes part of this system
change? and (2) what structures or mechanisms supported or enabled t hese
positive processes? As described earlier in this chapter, relational coordi-
nation theory suggests that relationships and structures work together in
mutually reinforcing ways to result in positive change processes. When
structures support, sustain, and reinforce reciprocal relationships across all

levels of a system, they can enable positive processes such as positive emoting,
positive interrelating, and positive meaning-making. This study examined
positive processes and explored what structures might have enabled them.
Study Methods
Data sources included 60 in-depth interviews with professional develop-
ment providers and state education agency staff, meeting observations,
and document review, collected over a one-year period. Using a deductive
coding method (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014), I analyzed t hese qual-
itative data in ATLAS.ti (ATLAS.ti, 2011) by comparing them to an ana-
lytic template that reflected positive change frameworks and mechanisms
(Dutton & Glynn, 2008). Then, through inductive coding methods, I iden-
tified emergent analytic codes, themes, and patterns, and applied those to
the data. This two-part method enabled the identification of positive pro
cesses and supporting structures that could be matched to the theoreti-
cal framework, and also allowed for the emergence of new or unexpected
themes. The analysis included a focus on how structures enabled positive
processes by supporting, sustaining, and reinforcing reciprocal relation-
ships among the participants in the implementation process. The use of
multiple sources of data enabled triangulation, thus strengthening confi-
dence in the findings (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014; Yin, 2013).
Study Findings and Contributions

This study found that the use of a positive change lens made collective
resilience visible in this state’s system change effort. Because this positive
change inquiry was part of a larger implementation study of this reform,
we saw how the positive change dynamics would likely have remained invis-
ible without the specific application of the POS lens in designing this study
and analyzing the data. This study offers three important contributions.
First, it documented that positive acts of change can be found within a
complex early education system change process, and suggested how these
positive processes contributed to resilient and adaptive responses. This
study provided evidence of participants’ ability to make sense of, adapt to,
and positively contribute to change. The deep commitment to the early edu-
cation field by many study participants was a resource that was unleashed
through these positive processes. Compassion also emerged as a recurring
theme, reflecting participants’ resilient response to the stress inherent in
systems change, particularly in a field in which job stress is already high
and salaries are low.
One way that t hese positive processes may have improved change was
by triggering generative, rather than negative, spirals that increased posi-
tive interactions, providing hope and energy and momentum for change.
One participant in this study described just such a spiral: “if you have some-
body sort of leading the way who puts a positive spin on it then it’s much
easier to feel positive.” Another participant described how professional
development providers went “out t here with a smile on their face” to help
local educators learn how to navigate the dramatically different system,
modeling a positive rather than a negative response to the change. Profes-
sional development providers actively engaged in the co-creation of the new
system, through giving feedback to state agency staff and taking on a bound-
ary spanner role to translate information in supportive ways to local edu-
cators. They made positive meaning when they framed aspects of the change
process as an opportunity for learning and achieving their own goals. This
positive meaning-making is a powerf ul act because it can increase a sense
of control as well as ownership of the change process (Dutton & Glynn,
2008).
Second, consistent with relational organizational theory (Gittell, 2003),
the study found that specific structures were put into place that supported
and enabled t hese positive processes. For example, cross-sector cross-role
meetings with face-to-face interactions built connections among partici-
pants and an awareness of each other’s perspectives. The meetings created
space for respectful interactions, caring and compassion, and recognition
of shared goals, a finding that supports prior research (Faraj & Xiao, 2006;
Kellogg, 2009). These kinds of structures embed reciprocal relationships
into the infrastructure for system change. They created opportunities for
high-quality communication, often among people who otherwise would not
have had opportunities to interact and build reciprocal relationships.
Third, these findings suggest that we can design systems change in ways
that deliberately enable positive processes. The structures that supported
positive relationships contributed to many of the positive processes we
found, such as positive meaning-making. This study was a first effort to
apply a positive change lens to early education systems change, and it opens
the door to much greater application and exploration of the positive rela-
tionships and processes in this context.
Future Directions
Positive organizational scholarship offers new ways to understand and
investigate the pressing issues facing the early childhood education field
today. A growing awareness of the importance of relationships and caring
at work demands that we generate new knowledge about how to preserve
and support caring and relational practices. Stone (2000) called the preser-
vation of caring in professional and organizational culture “the policy prob
lem of the future.” As the care of many groups in society increasingly
moves from the private into the public sphere, it is critical to know how poli-
cies and organizational practices can best support caring professional-
client partnerships. At the same time, the early childhood education context
offers an ideal setting for studying caring in the formal organizational con-
text. This offers the POS discipline many opportunities to learn about pos-
itive relationships from a long tradition of professional caring.
A clear implication from the research presented here is that quality
improvement efforts may be more effective when specific attention is given
to creating a supportive organizational climate and positive relationships
among staff. Research and policy are increasingly focused on strategies for
improving the impact of professional development and quality improve-
ment investments on teaching, program quality, and child outcomes. POS
research offers many new paths to discovering innovations that might accel-
erate progress. Further research is needed to advance understanding about
how to measure and improve these relational dynamics and systems.
Another implication is that positive relational work systems may give rise
to leadership from within all levels of an organization or system. This col-
lective leadership taps the wisdom of those on the front lines of serv ice
delivery and may be instrumental in achieving quality and improvement
outcomes. This is especially important in the early education context, a
largely female profession in which few leadership development opportuni-
ties or systems currently exist. It is time to build knowledge about the
resilience, persistence, and leadership of early educators as d
rivers of change,
improvement, and innovation (Douglass, 2017).
CONCLUSION
This chapter described current research on positive relationships among
adults in the early childhood education context. The POS literature offers a
unique lens for understanding t hese organizational dynamics. This research
seeks to understand how those relationships influence the quality of early
learning programs and systems. This positive lens makes visible the trans-
formative potential of positive change and positive relationships at work.
Without this lens, change research often identifies only the challenges and
failures in change, rather than the possibilities and positive deviants.
Positive organizational scholarship is new to the early education research
arena. Extending POS research into this sector presents an opportunity to
build the science about how to more effectively improve and strengthen
early childhood programs. Over 80 percent of children’s brain development
occurs during the first five years of life, and high-quality child care and
early education can have a lifelong transformational impact on c hildren’s
learning and success in life. Yet the quality of most child care remains
unacceptably low, and high-quality child care options are out of reach for
most families. The child care workforce is in crisis, with high turnover
and low compensation. Child care businesses are struggling financially to
make ends meet, which undermines their capacity to focus on quality
enhancements.
What if we unleashed the power of POS to better understand how to
transform the quality of early care and education? How can we support
early education professionals to thrive, to build positive work and learning
environments, to be inspired and to inspire, and to discover what is possi
ble for them and for the children and families they serve? How might we
redesign systems and policies in this sector to support a thriving workforce
and positive work environments? POS has an important contribution to
make in this essential sector. The unique contribution of POS is its focus
on the discovery of human potential. The core mission of the early child-
hood profession is strikingly similar—to develop h uman potential and
capabilities so that all c hildren thrive. This synergy of purpose has the
potential to generate new theories and scientific advances about relational
organizational systems that cultivate learning and thriving at all levels—
with c hildren, employees, and parents.
REFERENCES
Ackerman, D. J. (2008). Continuity of care, professional community, and the pol-
icy context: Potential benefits for infant and toddler teachers’ professional
development. Early Education and Development, 19(5), 753–722.
Adler, P. S., Kwon, S., & Heckscher, C. (2008). Professional work: The emergence of
collaborative community. Organization Science, 19(2), 359–376.
Apple, P., & McMullen, M. B. (2007). Envisioning the impact of decisions made
about early childhood professional development systems by different con-
stituent groups. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 8(3), 255–264.
ATLAS.ti. Version 6.1. (2011). Berlin, Scientific Software Development.
Baum, A. C., & McMurray-Schwarz, P. (2004). Preservice teachers’ beliefs about
family involvement: Implications for teacher education. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 32(1), 57–61.
Bernhard, J. K. (1998). Troubled relationships in early childhood education: Parent-
teacher interactions in ethnoculturally diverse child care settings. Early
Education and Development, 9(1), 5–28.
Bloom, P. J. (1991). Child care centers as organizations: A social systems perspec-
tive. Child and Youth Care Forum, 20(5), 313–333.
Bromer, J., & Henly, J. R. (2004). Child care as f amily support: Caregiving practices
across child care providers. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 941–964.
Burton, C. B. (1992). Family as a focus for early education reform: The implications
of public school teacher perspectives. Journal of Research in Childhood Edu-
cation, 7(1), 37–45.
Cameron, C., Mooney, A., & Moss, P. (2002). The child care workforce: Current
conditions and f uture directions. Critical Social Policy, 22(4), 572–595.
Cameron, K. S. (2008). Paradox in positive organizational change. The Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science, 44(1), 7–24. doi:10.1177/0021886308314703
Cameron, K. S., & Spreitzer, G. M. (Eds.). (2012). The Oxford handbook of positive
organizational scholarship. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cancian, F. (2000). Paid emotional care: Organizational forms that encourage nur-
turance. In M. H. Meyer (Ed.), Care work: Gender, class, and the welfare
state (pp. 136–148). New York: Routledge.
Caza, B. B., & Caza, A. (2008). Positive organizational scholarship: A critical the-
ory perspective. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(1), 21–33. doi:10.1177
/1056492607305907
Cooperrider, D. L., & Godwin, N. (2012). Positive organ izational development:
Innovation-inspired change in an economy and ecology of strengths.
In K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of posi-
tive organizational scholarship (pp. 737–750). New York: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Douglass, A. (2011). Improving family engagement: The organizational context and
its influence on partnering with parents in formal child care settings. Early
Childhood Research & Practice, 13(2).
Douglass, A. (2014). Resilience in change: Positive perspectives on the dynamics of
change in early childhood systems. Journal of Early Childhood Research.
doi:10.1177/1476718x14555704
Douglass, A. (2015, December 2). Building capacity for organizational improvement
in early care and education: The breakthrough series collaborative approach.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Child Care Policy Research
Consortium, sponsored by the Office of Planning, Research and Evalua-
tion (OPRE) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC.
Douglass, A. (2016, April 8). Innovations in early educator professional develop-
ment: Collaborative learning and improvement. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Wash-
ington, DC.
Douglass, A., & Gittell, J. H. (2012). Transforming professionalism: Relational
bureaucracy and parent-teacher partnerships in child care settings. Jour-
nal of Early Childhood Research. doi:10.1177/1476718x12442067
Douglass, A., & Klerman, L. (2012). The Strengthening Families initiative and child
care quality improvement: How Strengthening Families influenced change
in child care programs in one state. Early Education & Development. doi:
10.1080/10409289.2012.666193
Douglass, A. L. (2017). Leading for change in early care and education: Cultivating
leadership from within. New York: Teachers College Press.
Dunst, C. (2002). Family-centered practices: Birth through high school. Journal of
Special Education, 36(3), 139–147.
Durlak, J. A. (2010). The importance of doing well in whatever you do: A commen-
tary on the special section, implementation research in early childhood
education. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(3), 348–357.
Dutton, J. E., & Glynn, M. (2008). Positive organizational scholarship. In C. Coo-
per & J. Barling (Eds.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 693–712).
Los Angeles: Sage.
Eaton, S. C. (2000). Beyond ‘unloving care’: Linking human resource management
and patient care quality in nursing homes. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 11(3), 591–616.
Faraj, S., & Xiao, Y. (2006). Coordination in fast-response organizations. Manage-
ment Science, 52(8), 1155–1169.
Fischer, F., & Sirianni, C. (1984). Organization theory and bureaucracy: A critical
introduction. In F. Fischer & C. Sirianni (Eds.), Critical studies in organization
theory and bureaucracy (pp. 3–20). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Fitz Gibbon, H. (2002). Child care across sectors: A comparison of the work of
child care in three settings. In F. Cancian, D. Kurz, A. London, R. Reviere, &
M. Tuominen (Eds.), Child care and inequality: Rethinking carework for
children and youth (pp. 145–158). New York: Routledge.
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Imple-
mentation research: A synthesis of the literature (Vol. FMHI Publication
#231). Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida M ental
Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network.
Fletcher, J. K. (1999). Disappearing acts: Gender, power, and relational practice at
work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gittell, J. (2008). Relationships and resilience. The Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science, 44(1), 25–47.
Gittell, J. H. (2002). Relationships between service providers and their impact on
customers. Journal of Service Research, 4(4), 299–311.
Gittell, J. H. (2003). The Southwest Airlines way: Using the power of relationships to
achieve high performance. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gittell, J. H. (2016). Transforming relationships for high performance: The power of
relational coordination. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Gittell, J. H., & Douglass, A. (2012). Relational bureaucracy: Structuring recipro-
cal relationships into roles. Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 709–
733. doi:10.5465/amr.2010.0438
Glisson, C. (2002). The organizational context of children’s mental health services.
Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5(4), 233–253.
Golden-Biddle, K., & Mao, J. (2012). What makes an organizational change pro
cess positive? In K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford hand-
book of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 763–772). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Goldstein, L. S. (2007). Beyond the DAP versus standards dilemma: Examining the
unforgiving complexity of kindergarten teaching in the United States. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 22(1), 39–54.
Goode, T., & Jones, W. (2007). A guide for advancing family-centered and cultur-
ally and linguistically competent care. Retrieved from Washington, DC:
Georgetown University.
Gordon, J., & Patterson, J. (2008). “It’s what w e’ve always been d
oing.” Exploring
tensions between school culture and change. Journal of Educational
Change, 9(1), 17–35. doi:10.1007/s10833-007-9032-z
Halgunseth, L., Peterson, A., Stark, D., & Moodie, S. (2009). Family engagement:
Diverse families and early childhood education programs: An integrated
review of the literature. Washington, DC: National Association for the Edu-
cation of Young C hildren and Pre-K Now.
Harvard Family Research Project. (2000). The national network of partnership
schools: A model for family-school-community partnerships. Retrieved from
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Heckman, J. J. (2012). Invest in early childhood development: Reduce deficits,
strengthen the economy. Chicago: The Heckman Equation Project. Retrieved
from http://heckmanequation.org/content/resource/invest-early-childhood
-development-reduce-deficits-strengthen-economy
Heckscher, C. C., & Adler, P. S. (2006). The firm as a collaborative community:
Reconstructing trust in the knowledge economy. New York: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Hemmelgarn, A. L., Glisson, C., & Dukes, D. (2001). Emergency room culture and
the emotional support component of family-centered care. Children’s
Health Care, 30, 93–110.
Horm, D. (2003). Preparing early childhood educators to work in diverse urban set-
tings. Teachers College Record, 105(2), 226–244.
Hyson, M., & Whittaker, J. V. (2012). Professional development in early childhood
systems. In S. L. Kagan & K. Kauerz (Eds.), Early childhood systems: Trans-
forming early learning (pp. 104–118). New York: Teachers College Press.
Institute for Healthcare Improvement. (2004). The breakthrough series: IHI’s col-
laborative model for achieving breakthrough improvement. Diabetes Spec-
trum: A Publication of the American Diabetes Association, 17, 97–101.
Institute of Medicine and Nation Research Council. (2012). The early childhood
care and education workforce: Challenges and opportunities. Washington,
DC: The National Academies Press.
Kagan, S. L., & Kauerz, K. (Eds.). (2012). Early childhood systems: Transforming
early learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Kagan, S. L., & Rigby, E. (2003). Improving the readiness of c hildren for school: Rec-
ommendations for state policy. Retrieved from Washington DC: Center for
the Study of Social Policy.
Kellogg, K. C. (2009). Operating room: Relational spaces and microinstitutional
change in surgery. The American Journal of Sociology, 115(3), 657–711.
Keyes, C. R. (2002). A way of thinking about parent/teacher partnerships for teach-
ers. International Journal of Early Years Education, 10(3), 177.
Lamoine, S. (2008). Workforce designs: A policy blueprint for state early childhood
professional development systems. Washington, DC: National Association
for the Education of Young C hildren.
Lavine, M. (2012). Positive deviance: A metaphor and method for learning from
the uncommon. In S. C. Kim & M. S. Gretchen (Eds.), The Oxford hand-
book of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 1014–1026). New York:
Leana, C. R., & Barry, B. (2000). Stability and change as simultaneous experiences
in organizational life. Academy of Management. The Academy of Manage-
ment Review, 25(4), 753–759.
MacFarlane, K., & Lewis, P. (2012). United we stand: Seeking cohesive action in
early childhood education and care. Contemporary Issues in Early Child-
hood, 13(1), 63–73.
McWilliam, R. A., McMillen, B. J., Sloper, K. M., & McMillen, J. S. (1997). Early
education and child care program philosophy about families. In C. J. Dunst
& M. Wolery (Eds.), Family policy and practice in early child care (Vol. 9,
pp. 61–104). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Metz, A. J., Halle, T. G., Bartley, L., & Blasberg, A. (2013). The key components of
successful implementation. In T. Halle, A. Metz, & I. Martinez-Beck (Eds.),
Applying implementation science in early childhood programs and systems.
Baltimore: Brookes.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A
methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Morgaine, C. (1999). Alternative paradigms and professionalizing childhood care
and education: The Oregon example. Child & Youth Care Forum, 28(1), 5–19.
National Center on Child Care Professional Development Systems and Workforce
Initiatives Center. (2012). Aligned professional development systems plan-
ning and implementation guide. Washington, DC: Author.
National Institute of Child Health and H uman Development. (2006). The NICHD
study of early child care and youth development: Findings for children up to
age 4½ years. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and H uman
Services.
National Professional Development Center on Inclusion. (2008). What do we mean
by professional development in the early childhood field? Retrieved from
Chapel Hill, NC: http://npdci.fpg.u nc.edu/sites/npdci.f pg.u nc.edu/fi les
/resources/NPDCI_ProfessionalDevelopmentInEC _03-04 -08_0.pdf
Noddings, N. (1990). Feminist critiques in the professions. Review of Research in
Education, 16, 393–424.
Noddings, N. (2002). Starting at home: Care as the basis for social policy. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press.
Ochshorn, S. (2011). Forging a new framework for professional development:
A report on the science of professional development. Washington, DC:
Zero to Three.
Osgood, J. (2006). Deconstructing professionalism in early childhood education:
Resisting the regulatory gaze. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 7(1),
5–14.
Parlakian, R. (Ed.). (2002). Reflective supervision in practice: Stories from the field.
Washington, DC: Zero to Three.
Quinn, R. E., & Wellman, N. (2012). Seeing and acting differently: Positive change
in organizations. In K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford
handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 751–762). New York:
Rusher, A. S., & Ware, A. M. (1998). Family centered child care: Where have we been
and where are we g oing? Early Child Development and Care, 145, 67–79.
Satkowski, C. (2009). The next step in systems-building: Early Childhood Advisory

Councils and federal efforts to promote policy alignment in early childhood.
Washington, DC: New America Foundation.
Schaack, D., Tarrant, K., Boller, K., & Tout, K. (2012). Quality rating and improve-
ment systems: Frameworks for early care and education systems change.
In S. L. Kagan & K. Kauerz (Eds.), Early childhood systems: Transforming
early learning (pp. 71–86). New York: Teachers College Press.
Souto-Manning, M., & Swick, K. J. (2006). Teachers’ beliefs about parent and family
involvement: Rethinking our family involvement paradigm. Early Child-
hood Education Journal, 34(2), 187–193.
Stone, D. (2000). Caring by the book. In M. H. Meyer (Ed.), Care work: Gender,
class, and the welfare state (pp. 89–111). New York: Routledge.
Stoney, L., Mitchell, A., & Warner, M. E. (2006). Smarter reform: Moving beyond
single-program solutions to an early care and education system. Journal of
the Community Development Society, 37(2), 101–115.
Sutcliffe, K. M., & Vogus, T. J. (2003). Organizing for resilience. In K. S. Cameron,
J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: Foun-
dations of a new discipline (pp. 94–110). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Sykes, G. (1991). In defense of teacher professionalism as a policy choice. Educa-
tional Policy, 5(2), 137–149.
Takanishi, R. (2004). Leveling the playing field: Supporting immigrant children
from birth to eight. The Future of C hildren, 14(2), 61–80.
Tout, K., Metz, A., & Bartley, L. (2013). Considering statewide professional devel-
opment systems. In T. Halle, A. Metz, & I. Martinez-Beck (Eds.), Applying
implementation science in early childhood programs and systems (pp. 243–
268). Baltimore: Brookes.
Waerness, K. (1996). The rationality of caring. In S. Gordon, P. Benner, & N. Nod-
dings (Eds.), Caregiving (pp. 231–255). Philadelphia: University of Pennsyl-
vania Press.
Weber, M. (1984). Bureaucracy. In F. Fischer & C. Sirianni (Eds.), Critical studies
in organization and bureaucracy (pp. 24–39). Philadelphia: Temple Univer-
sity Press.
Winton, P. J., & McCollum, J. A. (2008). Preparing and supporting high-quality
early childhood pract it ioners: Issues and evidence. In P. J. Winton, J. A.
McCollum, & C. Catlett (Eds.), Practical approaches to early childhood pro-
fessional development (pp. 1–12). Washington, DC: Zero to Three.
Wood, E., & Bennett, N. (2000). Changing theories, changing practice: Exploring
early childhood teachers’ professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Edu-
cation, 16(5–6), 635–647. doi:http://d x.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)0 0
011-1
Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Zanetti, C. A., & Taylor, N. (2016). Value co-creation in healthcare through posi-
tive deviance. Healthcare, 4(4), 277–281.
Zhou, M. (2003). Urban education: Challenges in educating culturally diverse
children. Teachers College Record, 105(2), 208–225.
7
Developmental Tools That Build Social
and Emotional Competence in School:
A Focus on Effortful Control
and Ego-Resiliency
Zoe E. Taylor and Tracy L. Spinrad
INTRODUCTION
The goal of positive youth development is to build and strengthen assets
that enable youth to grow and flourish throughout life (Park, 2004). Tak-
ing a strengths-based approach is important, and rather than focusing on
deficits that may be present for youth, this approach examines the condi-
tions that promote thriving in youth. Therefore, a main focus for positive
youth development researchers is to elucidate factors that contribute to
youth success and well-being across a variety of developmental contexts.
Outside of the family, school is the most organ ized system in which
children spend their time. How successful c hildren are in contexts such as
school depends not only on cognitive and academic factors, but in large
part on c hildren’s social and emotional competence. Competence refers to
a person’s capacity to handle environmental demands and opportunities
in an active and effective way (Van Aken, 1992). Early school-age adapta-
tion and adjustment is predictive of long-term academic achievement and
119
success; thus, it is imperative to identify factors that contribute to compe-

tencies at school.
This chapter focuses on the role of c hildren’s adaptive characteristics on
academic achievement in childhood and adolescence. Using a strengths-
based approach, we focus on two facets of socioemotional functioning,
effortful control and ego-resiliency, characteristics that have been linked
to children’s competence and connections with others. Effortful control
pertains to capacities that can be used for behavioral and emotional self-
regulation, whereas ego-resiliency reflects how individuals adapt to envi-
ronmental stress, uncertainty, conflict, and change (Taylor, Eisenberg,
Spinrad, & Widaman, 2013). Th ese characteristics and competencies likely
have long-term adaptive value as they help build enduring personal resources,
including social connections with peers and teachers, environmental knowl-
edge, and coping strategies that are expected to positively contribute to aca-
demic success and functioning (Fredrickson & Losada, 2005). Children who
are higher in effortful control and ego-resiliency are more likely to persist
when experiencing challenges, better cope with classroom and peer stress-
ors, and achieve more in school (Kwok, Hughes, & Luo, 2007). In this chap-
ter, we discuss the growing evidence that fostering positive characteristics
such as effortful control and ego-resiliency are imperative for promoting
school adjustment and success and have lasting effects throughout child-
hood and adolescence. We first focus on the development of effortful control
and its relations to c hildren’s academics both directly and indirectly through
their social competence, relationships, and academic motivation. Next, we
address the role of ego-resiliency to school success and functioning, as well
as highlight the importance of considering high-risk contexts and gender
differences in ego-resiliency. Finally, interventions and future directions for
research are considered.
THE DEVELOPMENT AND BENEFITS OF EFFORTFUL

CONTROL FOR SCHOOL FUNCTIONING
Effortful control has been defined as “the ability to inhibit a dominant
response and/or to activate a subdominant response, to plan, and to detect
errors” (Rothbart & Bates, 2006, p. 129). Effortful control is measured in a
variety of ways, but researchers often have assessed c hildren’s effortful con-
trol with adults’ reports of children’s ability to shift and focus attention as
needed, to inhibit behavior, and to activate or perform an action. Behav-
ioral tasks that measure children’s ability to delay gratification, persist on
tasks, and sustain attention are also used. Effortful control (or components
of effortful control) emerges in late infancy and improves dramatically with
Tools That Build Social and Emotional Competence in School 121
age as a result of motor and cognitive maturation. There is also significant

growth in effortful control and executive attention during the preschool
years (Kochanska, Murray, & Harlan, 2000; Posner & Rothbart, 1998). Th ese
skills continue to develop through the school years and somewhat during
adolescence (Lengua, 2006; Murphy, Eisenberg, Fabes, Shepard, & Guthrie,
1999). Further, t here is evidence that effortful control shows stability over
time (Bridgett et al., 2011; Kochanska et al., 2000; Li-Grining, 2007; Spin-
rad et al., 2007, 2012). In other words, c hildren who are high in effortful
control at young ages tend to continue to be relatively high in effortful con-
trol as they grow.
It is not difficult to imagine why effortful control/regulation skills would
be critical for early school success (McClelland & Cameron, 2012; Raver,
2002, 2004). C hildren need the capacity to sit still, engage in class and learn-
ing activities, ignore distractions, shift attention from task to task, and be
able to follow directions (Ursache, Blair, & Raver, 2012). Conversely, children
who have difficulty managing their attention, behavior, and emotions are
likely to find school challenging. Thus, investigators have argued that effort-
ful control should be directly related to children’s school readiness and
academic functioning.
Indeed, there is a growing body of literature to support this idea.
Children who have high levels of effortful control or executive attention (a
component of effortful control) tend to have relatively high academic skills
and academic readiness (Allan, Hume, Allan, Farrington, & Lonigan, 2014;
Buckner, Mezzacappa, & Beardslee, 2009; Howse, Lange, Farran, & Boyles,
2003; Kopystynska, Spinrad, Seay, & Eisenberg, 2016; NICHD Early Child
Care Research Network, 2003; Rhoades, Warren, Domitrovich, & Green-
berg, 2011; Valiente et al., 2011, 2013; Valiente, Lemery-Chalfant, & Castro,
2007; Valiente, Lemery-Chalfant, Swanson, & Reiser, 2008; VanSchyndel,
Eisenberg, Valiente, & Spinrad, 2015; Zhou, Main, & Wang, 2010). Moreover,
effortful control has been associated with higher academic functioning,
even a fter controlling for general intelligence or earlier academic competence
(Clark, Pritchard, & Woodward, 2010; Clark, Sheffield, Wiebe, & Espy, 2013;
Espy et al., 2004; Graziano, Reavis, Keane, & Calkins, 2007).
In addition to general academic competence, researchers have examined
whether regulatory skills seem to predict different domains of children’s
academic skills, such as math and literacy abilities or w hether regulation is
related to learning more generally. For the most part, findings have shown
that effortful control (or components of effortful control, such as executive
functioning) is related to both math and literacy skills (McClelland et al.,
2007; Mertz et al., 2014; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2003;
Ponitz, McClelland, Matthews, & Morrison, 2009; Valiente et al., 2013).
However, results have been somewhat mixed. Liew and colleagues (2008)
showed effortful control to be related to reading, but not math, in third

grade, whereas other findings indicate associations between self-regulation
and mathematics (but not reading) once controlling for other cognitive
skills (Blair, Ursache, Greenberg, Vernon-Feagons, & Family Life Project
Investigators, 2015). In a recent meta-analysis, Allan and colleagues (2014)
demonstrated that that the relation between regulation and academic skills
was indeed somewhat stronger for math skills than for literacy skills (see
also Blair & Razza, 2007; McClelland et al., 2007; Ponitz et al., 2009).
Researchers have suggested that mathematic skills may require more exec-
utive functioning skills, attention shifting, and problem solving than do lit-
eracy abilities. Nonetheless, it appears that effortful control is generally
related to both domains of academics and is associated with a number of
factors related to school success and learning (for exception see Blair et al.,
2015).
Indirect Relations between Effortful Control

and School Adjustment
It is clear that children’s effortful control is an important skill for early
school success. However, researchers are still striving to understand how
children’s regulatory skills are associated with academics. That is, investi-
gators are focusing on potential processes that may account for the relations
between children’s effortful control and academic adjustment. We hypoth-
esize that the relation between children’s effortful control and academics is
at least partially mediated by factors such as social competence and adjust-
ment, children’s relationships with teachers, and academic motivation
(Eisenberg, Sadovsky, & Spinrad, 2005).
Social competence and (mal)adjustment. Investigators have shown
that effortful control is positively related to children’s social skills and pop-
ularity (Eisenberg et al., 2001; Eisenberg et al., 2003; Spinrad et al., 2006;
see Eisenberg, Hofer, Sulik, & Spinrad, 2014). In a study of toddlers, Spinrad
and colleagues (2007) showed effortful control was related to adults’ ratings
of social competence. Effortful control also has been associated with inter-
nalized, committed compliance (Kochanska, Coy, & Murray, 2001; Spinrad
et al., 2012). Further, children high in effortful control tend to be less vul-
nerable to peer victimization and peer rejection (Hanish et al., 2004; Iyer
et al., 2010) and report higher quality friendships (Blair et al., 2014).
On the other side of the coin, there is substantial evidence that children’s
lack of effortful control is associated with increased risk for problem behav
iors, such as aggression and conduct disorders, as well as internalizing
symptoms, in both childhood and adolescence (see Eisenberg et al., 2010).
Children who are low in effortful control tend to have a greater risk for
externalizing problems across various ages (Eisenberg, Cumberland et al.,

2001; Eisenberg et al., 2005; Kochanska, Barry, Aksan, & Bolt, 2008; Lengua
et al., 2014; Spinrad et al., 2007; see Eisenberg, Spinrad, & Eggum, 2010, for
review). The negative relation between effortful control and externalizing
problems also has been shown in longitudinal studies that account for stabil-
ity in both externalizing problems and effortful control (Belsky, Fearon, &
Bell, 2007; Spinrad et al., 2007). The negative relation between c hildren’s
effortful control and externalizing problems has been found in the United
States, China, and Indonesia (Eisenberg, Pidada & Liew, 2001; Zhou, Len-
gua, & Wang, 2009).
Unlike the robust findings for externalizing problems, the association
between effortful control and internalizing problems has been somewhat
mixed. Whereas effortful control (particularly attentional control) is gen-
erally negatively related to internalizing problems (Eisenberg, Cumberland
et al., 2001; Eisenberg et al., 2005; Kim-Spoon, Cicchetti, & Rogosch, 2013),
some studies have shown no relations (Spinrad et al, 2007) or even posi-
tive relations (Murray & Kochanska, 2002). Thus, the association between
effortful control and internalizing may depend on the aspect of effortful
control examined (i.e., attention versus inhibitory control) or the relations
may be moderated by other variables, such as temperamental negative
emotionality.
Children who are socially competent are likely to do well in school for a
variety of reasons. When children are accepted by peers, have friends, and
are compliant with rules, they are thought to be included in school activi-
ties, participate in school, and engage in academic activities. On the other
hand, children with externalizing problems may be disruptive in class, have
difficulties with their teachers and peers, and miss classroom opportuni-
ties while being disciplined for misbehavior. Thus, c hildren with external-
izing problems are thought to be at risk for academic problems (NICHD
Early Childcare Research Network, 2004). Further, students with internal-
izing problems may withdraw from their peers and learning opportunities,
placing these students at risk for academic challenges.
Indeed, empirical evidence has shown that social competence has been
positively related and problems behaviors negatively related, to academic
skills and readiness (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2004;
Welsh, Parke, Widaman, & O’Neil, 2001; see Denham, 2006). Kindergar-
ten children’s aggression and antisocial behaviors have been associated
with lower academic achievement (Ladd, Birch, & Buhs, 1999; Ladd & Bur-
gess, 2001), whereas prosocial behavior has been positively related to school
readiness (Palermo et al., 2007). Thus, if effortful control affects social com-
petence and low problem behaviors, it most likely also affects academic
skills directly and through its effect on social competence and problem
behaviors.
Although the specific meditational processes are rarely tested, t here is

some evidence that social competence at least partially mediates the rela-
tion between effortful control and academic achievement across one year,
even after controlling for earlier academics (Valiente et al., 2008). These
findings have been replicated with a number of samples (Chen, Zhang,
Chen, & Li, 2012; Valiente et al., 2011; Zhou et al., 2010). Similarly, research-
ers have found indirect relations between c hildren’s regulatory skills/
effortful control and academic functioning through both externalizing
(Graziano et al., 2007; Zhou et al., 2010) and internalizing problems (Morris
et al., 2013. Th ese findings provide initial support for the mediating role of
children’s social competence and problem behaviors in the relations between
effortful control and academic success in young c hildren.
The teacher-child relationship. Children’s effortful control may impact
children’s academic readiness by facilitating children’s positive relationships
with their teacher. C hildren’s relationships with teachers have been charac-
terized with either conflict or closeness (warmth and support). It is expected
that when children develop closer relationships with their teachers, they
receive more nurturing and individualized instruction than do their peers.
In turn, children with warm and supportive relationships with their teach-
ers are thought to adjust well to school. In contrast, when c hildren have
conflictual relationships with their teachers, children may feel increased
stress and negative emotions at school, creating an environment that can
interfere with learning. Empirical findings have supported these ideas.
Effortful control has been found to be associated with close and low-conflict
teacher-child relationships in preschool (Silva et al., 2011) and school-age
children (Diaz et al., 2017; Rudasill & Rimm-Kaufman, 2009; Swanson,
Valiente, & Lemery-Chalfant, 2012).
Findings also consistently indicate that the quality of the teacher-child
relationship predicts higher school motivation, academic competence, and
school readiness (Birch & Ladd, 1997; Hamre & Pianta, 2001; Palermo et al.,
2007; Pianta & Stuhlman, 2004; Silva et al., 2011; Williford, Maier, Downer,
Pianta, & Howes, 2013). Specifically, teacher-child closeness has been found
to predict early school success, whereas conflict in the teacher-child rela-
tionship has been related to poor academic achievement (Birch & Ladd,
1997; Hamre & Pianta, 2001). There have been few attempts to examine
whether the teacher-child relationship statistically mediates the relation
between effortful control and academic readiness. In one study, Valiente
et al. (2008) showed support for mediation, whereas Graziano and colleagues
(2007) did not (although the teacher-child relationship was a significant
predictor of academic success). More research using longitudinal and cross-
panel designs is needed in this area. Teacher-child relationships are undoubt-
edly bidirectional and vary across age and grade; thus, understanding the
role of teacher-child relationships throughout early schooling is an impor
tant area for research.
Academic motivation. Effortful control is also thought to contribute to

c hildren’s academic motivation, a construct that includes classroom engage-
ment, children’s attitudes about school, and classroom participation. In
theory, children who are low in effortful control may experience negative
emotions and frustration in the classroom—emotions that are believed to
undermine children’s satisfaction with school and school outcomes.
Children with relatively high effortful control abilities tend to have greater
feelings of inclusion and involvement in school. Support for the relation
between effortful control and classroom motivation has been found; effort-
ful control has been negatively related to school avoidance (Swanson et al.,
2012) and positively related to school liking (Valiente et al., 2007).
Further, classroom motivation is undoubtedly related to academic com-
petence (Ladd, Buhs, & Seid, 2000; Ladd & Burgess, 2001). For example, one
aspect of motivation, classroom participation, has been positively related
to academic functioning (Buhs & Ladd, 2001; Ladd, Birch, & Buhs, 1999;
Valiente, Swanson, Lemery-C halfant, & Berger, 2014). Another factor,
children’s enjoyment of school, appears to be an important predictor of
academic achievement. School liking positively predicts academic achieve-
ment, whereas school avoidance negatively predicts academic functioning
(Ladd & Dinella, 2009).
Researchers have demonstrated that the link between effortful control
and children’s academic success may be indirect through classroom moti-
vation. For example, Valiente and colleagues (2007) found that children’s
effortful control positively predicted school enjoyment, which in turn pre-
dicted academic competence. Other aspects of academic motivation, such as
school engagement and classroom participation, have been shown to medi-
ate the relation of effortful control to c hildren’s academic achievement (Iyer,
Kochenderfer-Ladd, Eisenberg, & Thompson, 2010; Valiente et al., 2014).
In sum, the research to date highlights the importance of effortful con-
trol on children’s greater academic success. Although teachers and parents
often assess c hildren’s school readiness with measures of letter knowledge
or mathematics skills, it is clear that socioemotional processes are perhaps
just as important to c hildren’s academic functioning.
The Development and Benefits of Ego-Resiliency

for School Functioning
How c hildren cope with and adjust to new experiences and challenges
has important implications for their social-emotional development, partic-
ularly in a school setting where c hildren are exposed on a day-to-day basis
to changing academic and social experiences. Ego-resiliency is a trait that
reflects how individuals adapt to environmental stress, uncertainty, con-
flict, and change (Block & Block, 2006). An ego-resilient child is a dept at
adapting to changing circumstances, can shift behavior as needed, is

resourceful and persistent, and uses problem-solving strategies flexibly. In
contrast, a nonresilient child is disquieted by new and changing circum-
stances, tends to brood and worry, goes to pieces under stress, and has dif-
ficulty recouping after traumatic experiences (Block & Block, 2006).
Although modestly to moderately related to effortful control, ego-
resiliency is a construct unique from temperamental processes such as
effortful control (see Block & Block, 2006; Eisenberg et al., 2004; Martel
et al., 2007; Shields & Cicchetti, 1997; Taylor et al., 2013). Effortful control
is a superordinate construct that includes regulatory processes such as
attentional and inhibitory control and planning (Rothbart & Bates, 2006).
It pertains to capacities that can be used for behavioral and emotional self-
regulation. In contrast, ego-resiliency reflects individuals’ dynamic and
resourceful adaptability or characteristic coping style with stress and the
ability to rebound (Block & Block, 2006). In other words, ego-resiliency
is viewed as less constitutionally based than are regulatory characteris-
tics, and more a measure of how well individuals adapt and deal with stress-
ful interactions. Empirical research has supported this distinction, and
researchers have found that effortful control in early childhood provides the
early building blocks toward c hildren’s ego-resiliency (Taylor et al., 2013).
School-age girls who delayed gratification, a facet of self-regulation, have also
been found to be more resourceful and competent, and were able to better
handle stress, compared to girls who did not delay (Funder & Block, 1989).
In early childhood, ego-resiliency is evident in how well children are able
to express affect in a situationally appropriate manner or find comfort when
needed, how well they equilibrate physiological responses, and whether they
are organized, persistent, and flexible when encountering challenges and
stressors (Arend, Gove, & Sroufe, 1979; Block & Block, 1980). As children get
older, ego-resiliency is evident in how well children manage stress and chal-
lenges. Ego-resiliency patterns in childhood are considered to be promotive,
as longitudinal evidence suggests that this construct increases the likelihood
of c hildren having competent adjustment later in their development.
Ego-Resiliency and School Achievement in Childhood

and Adolescence
There are good reasons to expect that ego-resiliency would predict school
functioning. Similar to work with effortful control, there is theoretical sup-
port for the notion that t here are indirect relations between ego-resiliency
and children’s school success particularly in regard to the effects on peer
relations, social competence, academic success, and internalizing and exter-
nalizing symptoms. These associations are evident across developmental
stages, although the effects may vary by sex as children reach adoles-
cence. Furthermore, ego-resiliency may be particularly beneficial for at-
risk children who are more susceptible to maladjustment at school.
Children higher in ego-resiliency often are higher on skills such as
flexibility and problem-solving skills that assist them academically. Higher
levels of ego-resiliency have also been directly associated with school
achievement in early and m iddle childhood (Arend et al., 1979; Kwok et al.,
2007; Martel et al., 2007). For example, researchers report that ego-resiliency
uniquely predicted first grade c hildren’s concurrent reading and math
achievement scores, as well as their reading and math achievement one year
later above and beyond the effects of general cognitive ability, externaliz-
ing problems, and family economic adversity (Kwok et al., 2007). Addition-
ally, ego-resiliency has been positively associated with cognitive functioning
and attentiveness (Martel et al., 2007), as well as higher levels of curiosity
(Arend et al., 1979). Low levels of ego-resiliency have been shown to be asso-
ciated with being retained in first grade in a study of low-income Hispanic
children (Willson & Hughes, 2006).
Few researchers have examined the direct effects of ego-resiliency on
academic outcomes and achievement in adolescence. However, by adoles-
cence, youth with higher ego-resiliency have been shown to develop more
sophisticated social cognition and have higher academic achievement than
their less resilient counterparts (Causadias, Salvatore, & Sroufe, 2012; Mar-
tel et al., 2007; Robins, John, Caspi, Moffitt, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1996).
Boys who were relatively low on ego-resiliency w ere more likely to be
described as hostile, impulsive, rebellious, and lacking in warmth, and had
relatively low academic performance (Robins et al., 1996). Parenting remains
important to the development of ego-resiliency in adolescence, and sup-
portive parenting is linked to adolescents’ ego-resiliency, which in turn is
linked to their academic performance in school (Swanson, Valiente, Lemery-
Chalfant, & O’Brien, 2011; Trask-Tate, Cunningham, & Lang-DeGrange,
2010). Adolescents with low ego-resiliency w ere also found to seek help from
teachers less often, report higher levels of stress and loneliness, and be dis-
trustful of potential sources of social support during the transition to col-
lege (Larose & Bernier, 2001; Taylor, Doane, & Eisenberg, 2014).
Indirect Relations between Ego-Resiliency

and School Achievement
As with effortful control, relations between ego-resiliency and school
adjustment and achievement can additionally have indirect effects, espe-
cially through children’s social relationships with peers, their social com-
petence, and internalizing and externalizing symptoms and behaviors.
Peer relations and social competence. How children manage their own
emotions and behaviors when they are experiencing stress would be
expected to affect their response to others’ emotions and may be particu-
larly beneficial during childhood as peer relations are being developed. This
hypothesis has been supported by researchers who have shown that ego-
resiliency is directly associated with popularity and social competence with
peers in childhood (Block & Block, 1980; Cumberland-Li, Eisenberg, & Reiser,
2004; Eisenberg et al., 1997; Eisenberg, Spinrad, & Morris, 2002; Spinrad
et al., 2006; Taylor, Eisenberg, VanSchyndel, Eggum-Wilkens, & Spinrad,
2014; Van Aken, 1992). Higher levels of ego-resiliency in girls was also
associated with being more agreeable, conscientious, and less reactive and
aggressive (Kwok et al., 2007). Elementary school-age children with higher
ego-resiliency additionally have higher levels, and higher growth, of empa-
thy than c hildren with lower levels (Magnus, Cowen, Wyman, Fagen, &
Work, 1999; Parker, Cowen, Work, & Wyman, 1990). As empathy is linked to
indices of social competence, such as prosocial behavior with peers and pop-
ularity, fostering ego-resiliency in early childhood could promote higher
levels of social competence in children.
Ego-resiliency likely relates to high-quality friendships and popularity
because peers find resilient c hildren to be more pleasing company than
youth who do not adapt well when faced with challenges (Swanson et al.,
2011). Th
ese are skills that appear to promote higher levels of social com-
petence as children move into adolescence. Adolescents high in ego-
resiliency are more flexible and open in social contexts and have been
shown to have higher levels of social competence (Eisenberg et al., 2003;
Hofer, Eisenberg, & Reiser, 2010; Martel et al., 2007; Swanson et al., 2011).
Researchers have found that ego-resiliency measured in childhood at age 7
predicted the development of friendship understanding and moral judg-
ment in adolescence (Hart, Keller, Edelstein, & Hofmann, 1998). The effect
of ego-resiliency was found even after controlling for IQ and prior child-
hood social-cognitive development. The authors hypothesize that ego-
resiliency may influence social competence by increasing opportunities for
social participation, which would contribute to higher levels of friendship
understanding and moral judgement. In contrast, c hildren who lack social
experiences b ecause they are more withdrawn or are more reactive to stress
are more likely to lack the experience needed to gain social knowledge as
they move into adolescence.
The positive benefits of ego-resiliency on social competence also have
been shown to extend into early adulthood. Hennighausen and colleagues
(2004) reported that youth who attained or maintained higher levels of ego-
resiliency in adolescence reported more complex sharing of experiences,
more collaborative conflict-resolution strategies, and greater interpersonal
understanding in early adulthood, and were rated as less hostile and more
flexible by their peers. In contrast, less flexible youth w ere seen as more
impulsive and hostile, and w ere described as having more egocentric con-
flict tactics, and less interpersonal understanding in their relationships.
Internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Ego-resilient individuals
are more likely to receive positive social responses, and express emotional
stability, and thus achieve a better adaptation to the environment. This can
translate into fewer behavior problems, especially internalizing and exter-
nalizing symptoms that can become more problematic for school adjust-
ment and achievement (Causadias et al., 2012; Hofer et al., 2010; Kwok
et al., 2007; Robins et al., 1996).
Children who are lower in ego-resiliency often lack flexibility in dealing
with stressful or novel situations and tend to have higher levels of internal-
izing symptoms (Eisenberg et al., 2004). Ego-resiliency has also been found
to mediate the relations of effortful control and impulsivity to internaliz-
ing problems (Eisenberg, Chang, Ma, & Huang, 2009), and withdrawn
behavior has also been associated with lower levels of ego-resiliency (Eggum
et al., 2009). Ego-resiliency has also been linked to lower physiological stress
as reflected by morning cortisol levels, but only in nonmaltreated c hildren;
this association was not significant for maltreated c hildren, suggesting that
high environmental stressors may cancel out any benefits bestowed by ego-
resiliency (Cicchetti & Rogosch, 2007).
As c hildren move into adolescence, they are faced with numerous chal-
lenges relating to increased responsibility and independences that can lead
to higher levels of maladjustment. Adolescence is additionally a time of
increased emotional reactivity and potentially greater sensitivity to stress-
ors (Doom & Gunnar, 2013; Spear, 2000). It is therefore likely that adaptive
responses to stress in adolescence predict positive outcomes across a range
of developmental domains that are linked to school success. Indeed, ego-
resiliency is found to have significant implications for youth’s successful
adaption throughout adolescence and into early adulthood (Alessandri,
Eisenberg, Vecchione, Caprara, & Milioni, 2016; Hennighausen, Hauser,
Billings, Schultz, & Allen, 2004; Milioni et al., 2015). Martel and colleagues
(2007) found lower ego-resiliency, poor response inhibition, and low reac-
tive control both uniquely and additively predicted internalizing symptoms
in adolescents. Other researchers report that ego-resiliency mediates the
relations between effortful control and internalizing problems (Hofer et al.,
2010). Overall, evidence suggests that ego-resiliency is consistently associ-
ated with lower levels of internalizing symptoms, including anxiety and
depression, somatic complaints, thought problems, and withdrawal, and
that these relations persist across time (Alessandri et al., 2016; Causadias
et al., 2012; Chuang, Lamb, & Hwang, 2006; Milioni et al., 2015).
In regard to externalizing behaviors, children with higher levels of ego-

resiliency are reported to have lower levels of aggressive behaviors, atten-
tion problems, delinquency, and social problems than those with lower
ego-resiliency (Chuang et al., 2006; Eisenberg et al., 2010; Hofer et al., 2010;
Smeekens, Riksen-Walraven, & van Bakel, 2008). Robins and colleagues
(1996) showed that resilient individuals rarely develop antisocial behavior
and psychopathology, and are more socially successful. School-age c hildren
with lower levels of ego-resiliency have been found to have higher levels of
externalizing problems, especially in conjunction with environmental risk
factors, such as being children of alcoholics (Eisenberg et al., 2010), adopted
children (Juffer, Stams, & van Ijzendoorn, 2004), and having a history of being
maltreated (Cicchetti, Rogosch, Lynch, & Holt, 1993; Shonk & Cicchetti,
2001). However, there is also evidence that ego-resiliency may have curvi-
linear relations with impulsivity. Researchers have found that children with
mean levels of impulsivity were more resilient than children low in impul-
sivity, but c hildren with average and high levels of impulsivity w ere similar
on resiliency (Eisenberg et al., 2002).
There is also evidence of long-term developmental effects of ego-resiliency
from childhood into adolescence. For example, Causadias and colleagues
(2012) found that ego-resiliency measured in preschool predicted lower
externalizing symptoms, in particular aggressive behavior, at age 16. Other
researchers have found that lower ego-resiliency in preschool girls was
related to subsequent drug usage at age 14 in girls (Block, Block, & Keyes,
1988). Preschool-age children who went on to use drugs in adolescence were
described as restless, overreactive to frustration, unable to recoup a fter
stress, emotionally labile, lacking in calmness, and domineering.
Ego-Resiliency in the Context of High Risk

Ego-resiliency is a construct that is distinct from the concept of resil-
ience to adversity described in research on developmental psychopathol-
ogy (Luthar, 2006;, 2014). Ego-resiliency is a personality attribute, whereas
developmental resiliency refers to positive behavioral adaption in times of
significant adversity or stress. However, it is import ant to note that ego-
resiliency does appear to contribute to developmental resiliency in vulner-
able or at-risk children and youth, across a variety of contexts. Researchers
found that ego-resiliency was a partial mediator between acculturation
stress and m ental health outcomes in a sample of North Korean refugee
youths, although it did not buffer them from trauma exposure (Kim, Cho, &
Kim, 2015). Other researchers have found that ego-resiliency significantly
mediated the relations between emotional abuse, physical neglect, and emo-
tional neglect and mental health symptoms including anxiety, depression,
and self-harm behaviors (Philippe, Laventure, Beaulieu-Pelletier, Lecours, &

Lekes, 2011). Researchers have also explored the associations between ego-
resiliency and developmental resiliency in the context of maltreatment and
abuse. Although c hildren who are maltreated have significantly higher lev-
els of maladjustment and lower levels of adaptive functioning than nonmal-
treated c hildren (Cicchetti et al., 1993; Oshri, Rogosch, & Cicchetti, 2013),
there is also evidence that ego-resiliency may account for variance in adap-
tive functioning for maltreated c hildren, with ego-resiliency mediating the
link between early child abuse and adolescent substance use (Oshri, Rogosch,
Burnette, & Cicchetti, 2011).
Gender Differences in Ego-Resiliency

It also may be important to address and acknowledge that there may be
gender differences in ego-resiliency that also relate to success at school,
particularly as children enter into adolescence. Overall, ego-resiliency is
expected to increase with age for both boys and girls, and appears to main-
tain rank order stability (Block & Block, 2006). However, researchers have
documented sex differences in ego-resiliency across the transition into ado-
lescence, although findings have been mixed. In their seminal 30-year lon-
gitudinal study Block and Block (2006) reported that individual differences
in ego-resiliency are identifiable from early childhood and continue over the
next two decades. However, they found that for girls being ego-resilient, or
conversely vulnerable, during childhood did not imply they would be ego-
resilient in adolescence or adulthood. This instability appeared to become
particularly pronounced as girls entered puberty. In contrast, another lon-
gitudinal study covering a 13-year span found that boys had lower levels of
ego-resiliency and experienced more declines in this construct during ado-
lescence, whereas girls became more resilient (Chuang et al., 2006). Taylor
and colleagues (2014) found sex differences in ego-resiliency at age 18 that
appeared to dissipate by age 20, although this sample was predominantly
female. Ego-resiliency was found to have a greater effect on the development
of moral judgement in boys than it does in girls across adolescence (Hart
et al., 1998). It may be the case that girls undergo more psychological
restructuring in their adaptive strategies during adolescence than boys
(Block & Block, 2006). However, given that other researchers who have
addressed sex differences in ego-resiliency have not found significant asso-
ciations (Alessandri et al., 2016; Hofer et al., 2010; Milioni et al., 2015; Swan-
son et al., 2011) more research is needed.
In summary, researchers have found that ego-resiliency has a positive
influence on school outcomes as a result of both direct and indirect effects.
In particu lar, ego-resiliency appears to assist youth and children to cope
with stressors and challenges that often occur during the school-age years.
Also of importance is that ego-resiliency has critical indirect effects on
social relationships, externalizing behaviors, and internalizing symptoms
that are associated with school success and learning.
F UTURE DIRECTIONS: FOSTERING POSITIVE

CHARACTERISTICS IN SCHOOL-AGE C HILDREN
The research discussed in this chapter highlights the growing evidence
of the importance of fostering positive psychological traits and factors in
relation to promoting children’s and youth’s school adjustment and success.
Researchers have found evidence that effortful control and ego-resiliency
are important for academic competence, even a fter controlling for cognitive
ability. Effortful control has clear links to academic success and learning, as
well as crucially important indirect benefits on peer and teacher relationships,
social competence, and overall adjustment. In terms of ego-resiliency,
research evidence suggests that early levels of ego-resiliency serve as a pro-
motive f actor for the development of global competence and adjustment in
later childhood and adolescence, as well as a buffer for children at risk for mal-
adjustment. Because regulatory skills develop into adolescence (Collins &
Steinberg, 2006), they may continue to contribute to adolescents’ abilities
to modulate their behavior and reactions to stressful events, both of which
would be expected to affect the quality of social and psychological func-
tioning. Thus, programs designed to problem behaviors might focus both
on teaching individuals methods to rebound in stressful situations (ego
resiliency) and on methods to increase attentional focusing and the ability
to inhibit behaviors as needed (effortful control) (Hofer et al., 2010).
Importantly, there is evidence that interventions directed at improving
and strengthening children’s effortful control and ego-resiliency would have
important implications for c hildren’s concurrent and long-term academic
and behavioral adjustment (Shonk & Cicchetti, 2001). School readiness
training and early education programs should target effortful control and
ego-resiliency as important entry points for promoting academic success
and learning. Based on the research discussed, such trainings could be
beneficial for both young children and youth. The development and
strengthening of socioemotional skills does not take away from the devel-
opment of academic skills given that c hildren with higher effortful control
and ego-resiliency are more likely to do better academically. Thus, interven-
tions could focus on these characteristics as a way to improve overall
adjustment and competence at school.
Positive results have been found in such programs, at least with young
children. For example, Bierman and colleagues (2008) tested the effectiveness
of the Head Start REDI program, which was designed to promote pre-
school c hildren’s socioemotional competence (emotion understanding,
emotion regulation, inhibiting impulsivity, conflict resolution skills) as well
as early literacy skills on academic success. The Tools of the Mind program
(Diamond, Barnett, Thomas, & Munro, 2007) was designed to support
children’s executive functioning and social skills through sociodramatic
play. These programs have been effective in improving children’s regulatory
skills and emergent academic skills. One issue with such research is that the
existing programs have been designed to foster a variety of social and emo-
tional skills. Thus, more interventions directed at specifically promoting
effortful control are needed. Nevertheless, intervention t rials of this sort are
promising areas for f uture study, and factors that may moderate interven-
tion effects (such as age, emotional reactivity, and initial levels of effortful
control) should be considered.
Interventions specifically aimed at ego-resiliency are less common; how-
ever, it appears evident that youth with higher ego-resiliency are more
effective at adaptively responding to stressors and challenges, and this in
turn allows for higher resourcefulness and coping strategies, improvements
in peer relations, a more positive outlook, and better mental and physical
health, all of which benefit children’s academic learning (Swanson et al.,
2011). Interventions aimed at increasing children’s ego-resiliency could
focus on improving adaptive flexibility, ability to respond to the dynamic
requirements of situations, and strategies to perseverate under stress or in
novel circumstances (Causadias et al., 2012). Fostering ego-resiliency in an
educational setting is an important interventional point as schools are
places where children spend a large majority of their day, and thus are ideal
locations for implementing programs designed to support children and pro-
vide training in how to cope and overcome challenges and stressors (Condly,
2006). It is expected that c hildren who learn strategies to persevere and
adapt when challenged w ill be more successful at coping with the stressors
and changes that occur as c hildren progress academically.
In particular, having interventions focused on ego-resiliency in schools
may be of particu lar benefit for highly vulnerable c hildren such as t hose
who have been maltreated. Giving children the skills to foster positive
relationships at school with teachers and peers would likely boost their
adaptive functioning (Flores, Cicchetti, & Rogosch, 2005). Furthermore, the
benefits of ego-resiliency may be more pronounced for children who face
threats to their academic outcomes (Kwok et al., 2007). Better understand-
ing the contexts in which ego-resiliency thrives or is negated would be use-
ful in intervention efforts, both in regards to designing programs that
strengthen f actors that promote c hildren’s ego-resiliency, and in selecting
children who are most in need or who would benefit the most from inter-
ventions. Longitudinal studies of ego-resiliency are also few, and thus the
long-term implications for maintaining ego-resiliency, or for achieving

growth in ego-resiliency, are not well understood or documented.
It should also be noted that positive parenting behaviors are associated
with both effortful control and ego-resiliency. Although not covered in this
chapter due to our focus on school environment, age-appropriate parent-
ing programs are likely to be an effective means of promoting effortful con-
trol and ego-resiliency in children and youth.
Last, it will be important for researchers to address and acknowledge
context in research examining the potential for interventions aimed at
improving both effortful control and ego-resiliency. For example, the major-
ity of studies assessing ego-resiliency have used low-risk, middle-class sam-
ples, and the few studies that employ high-risk, low SES samples rarely study
poverty in itself, but in combination with maltreatment (e.g., Cicchetti &
Rogosch, 1997; Flores, Cicchetti, & Rogosch, 2005; Shonk & Cicchetti, 2001;
for an exception see Causadias et al., 2012) or adoption (Juffer, Stams, van
Ijzedoorn, 2004). Therefore, it remains uncertain whether ego-resiliency is
equally effective across different risk contexts, or w
hether race or ethnicity
moderates such relations. Effortful control is also understudied in diverse
samples of c hildren.
Although it is likely that characteristics such as effortful control and ego-
resiliency have equal benefits on children across diverse populations (e.g.,
Sulik et al., 2010), it is important to address cultural contexts and to exam-
ine diverse populations both in regard to research on the effects of effort-
ful control and ego-resiliency on school outcomes, and particularly in
regard to interventions.
In sum, strengthening youth and child assets such as effortful control
and ego-resiliency are likely to promote positive youth development through
both their direct and indirect impacts on youth school and academic
adjustment. It w ill be important for researchers to continue to address the
importance of socioemotional f actors on promoting school success and
competencies. Building socioemotional competence through fostering
enduring personal resources such as effortful control and ego-resiliency is
likely to have positive effects on c hildren’s achievements and long-term
success.
The constructs of effortful control and ego-resiliency also have impor
tant implications for the development of positive relationships. C hildren
who demonstrate relatively high effortful control and ego-resiliency are
seen as more socially competent, popular with peers, and develop more pos-
itive adult-child relationships. Thus, interventions promoting t hese skills
may not only impact children’s school success, but are likely to promote
positive well-being through their impact on higher quality relationships
with parents, teachers, and peers.
REFERENCES
Alessandri, G., Eisenberg, N., Vecchione, M., Caprara, G. V., & Milioni, M. (2016).
Ego-resiliency development from late adolescence to emerging adulthood:
A ten-year longitudinal study. Journal of Adolescence, 50, 91–102. doi:10
.1016/j.adolescence.2016.05.004
Allan, N. P., Hume, L. E., Allan, D. M., Farrington, A. L., & Lonigan, C. J. (2014).
Relations between inhibitory control and the development of academic
skills in preschool and kindergarten: A meta-analysis. Developmental Psy
chology, 50(10), 2368–2379. doi:10.1037/a0037493
Arend, R., Gove, F. L., & Sroufe, L. A. (1979). Continuity of individual adaptation
from infancy to kindergarten: A predictive study of ego-resiliency and curi-
osity in preschoolers. Child Development, 50(4), 950–959. doi:10.2307/112
9319
Belsky, J., Pasco Fearon, R. M., & Bell, B. (2007). Parenting, attention and exter-
nalizing problems: Testing mediation longitudinally, repeatedly and recip-
rocally. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48(12), 1233–1242.
doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01807.x
Bierman, K. L., Domitrovich, C. E., Nix, R. L., Gest, S. D., Welsh, J. A., Greenberg,
M. T., . . . Gill, S. (2008). Promoting academic and social-emotional school
readiness: The head start REDI program. Child Development, 79(6), 1802–
1817. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01227.x
Birch, S. H., & Ladd, G. W. (1997). The teacher–child relationship and c hildren’s
early school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 35(1), 61–79. doi:10
.1016/S0022-4405(96)00029-5
Blair, C., & Razza, R. P. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and
false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kinder-
garten. Child Development, 78(2), 647–663. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007
.01019.x
Blair, C., Ursache, A., Greenberg, M., & Vernon-Feagans, L. (2015). Multiple aspects
of self-regulation uniquely predict mathematics but not letter–word knowl-
edge in the early elementary grades. Developmental Psychology, 51(4),
459–472. doi:10.1037/a0038813
Block, J., & Block, J. H. (2006). Venturing a 30-year longitudinal study. American
Psychologist, 61(4), 315–327. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.315
Block, J., Block, J. H., & Keyes, S. (1988). Longitudinally foretelling drug usage in
adolescence: Early childhood personality and environmental precursors.
Child Development, 59(2), 336–355. doi:10.2307/1130314
Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1980). The role of ego-control and ego-resiliency in the
organization of behavior. In W. A. Collins (Ed.), Minnesota symposia on
child psychology (Vol. 13). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bridgett, D. J., Gartstein, M. A., Putnam, S. P., Lance, K. O., Iddins, E., Waits, R., . . .
Lee, L. (2011). Emerging effortful control in toddlerhood: The role of infant
orienting/regulation, maternal effortful control, and maternal time spent
in caregiving activities. Infant Behavior & Development, 34(1), 189–199.
doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2010.12.0 08
Buckner, J. C., Mezzacappa, E., & Beardslee, W. R. (2009). Self-regulation and its
relations to adaptive functioning in low income youths. American Journal
of Orthopsychiatry, 79(1), 19–30. doi:10.1037/a0014796
Buhs, E. S., & Ladd, G. W. (2001). Peer rejection as antecedent of young c hildren’s
school adjustment: An examination of mediating processes. Developmen-
tal Psychology, 37(4), 550–560. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.37.4.550
Causadias, J. M., Salvatore, J. E., & Sroufe, L. A. (2012). Early patterns of self-
regulation as risk and promotive factors in development: A longitudinal study
from childhood to adulthood in a high-risk sample. International Journal
of Behavioral Development, 36(4), 293–302. doi:10.1177/0165025412444076
Chen, X., Zhang, G., Chen, H., & Li, D. (2012). Performance on delay tasks in early
childhood predicted socioemotional and school adjustment nine years l ater:
A longitudinal study in Chinese c hildren. International Perspectives in Psy
chology: Research, Practice, Consultation, 1(1), 3–14. doi:10.1037/a0026363
Chuang, S. S., Lamb, M. E., & Hwang, C. P. (2006). Personality development from
childhood to adolescence: A longitudinal study of ego-control and ego-
resiliency in Sweden. International Journal of Behavioral Development,
30(4), 338–343. doi:10.1177/0165025406072795
Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (1997). The role of self-organization in the promo-
tion of resilience in maltreated c hildren. Development and Psychopathol-
ogy, 9(4), 797–815. doi:10.1017/S0954579497001442
Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (2007). Personality, adrenal steroid hormones, and
resilience in maltreated c hildren: A multilevel perspective. Development
and Psychopathology, 19(3), 787–809. doi:10.1017/S0954579407000399
Cicchetti, D., Rogosch, F. A., Lynch, M., & Holt, K. D. (1993). Resilience in mal-
treated children: Processes leading to adaptive outcome. Development and
Psychopathology, 5(4), 629–647.
Clark, C. A. C., Pritchard, V. E., & Woodward, L. J. (2010). Preschool executive
functioning abilities predict early mathematics achievement. Developmen-
tal Psychology, 46(5), 1176–1191. doi:10.1037/a0019672
Clark, C. A. C., Sheffield, T. D., Wiebe, S. A., & Espy, K. A. (2013). Longitudinal
associations between executive control and developing mathematical com-
petence in preschool boys and girls. Child Development, 84(2), 662–677.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01854.x
Collins, W. A., & Steinberg, L. (2006). Adolescent development in interpersonal
context. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of
child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development
(6th ed., pp. 1003–1067). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Condly, S. J. (2006). Resilience in c hildren: A review of literature with implications
for education. Urban Education, 41(3), 211–236. doi:10.1177/00420859
06287902
Cumberland-Li, A., Eisenberg, N., & Reiser, M. (2004). Relations of young c hildren’s
agreeableness and resiliency to effortful control and impulsivity. Social
Development, 13(2), 193–212. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2004.000263.x
Denham, S. A. (2006). The emotional basis of learning and development in early
childhood education. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Handbook of
research on the education of young c hildren (2nd ed., pp. 85–103). Mahwah,

NJ: Erlbaum.
Diamond, A., Barnett, W. S., Thomas, J., & Munro, S. (2007). Preschool program
improves cognitive control. Science, 318(5855), 1387–1388. doi:10.1126/
science.1151148
Diaz, A., Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., VanSchyndel, S., Spinrad, T. L., Berger, R., . . .
Southworth, J. (2017). Relations of positive and negative expressivity and
effortful control to kindergarteners’ student–teacher relationship, academic
engagement, and externalizing problems at school. Journal of Research in
Personality, 67, 3–14. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2015.11.002
Doom, J. R., & Gunnar, M. R. (2013). Stress physiology and developmental psycho-
pathology: Past, present, and f uture. Development and Psychopathology,
25(4, Pt 2), 1359–1373. doi:10.1017/S0954579413000667
Eggum, N. D., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Valiente, C., Edwards, A., Kupfer, A. S., &
Reiser, M. (2009). Predictors of withdrawal: Possible precursors of avoidant
personality disorder. Development and Psychopathology, 21(3), 815–838.
doi:10.1017/S0954579409000443
Eisenberg, N., Chang, L., Ma, Y., & Huang, X. (2009). Relations of parenting style
to Chinese c hildren’s effortful control, ego resilience, and maladjustment.
Development and Psychopathology, 21(2), 455–477. doi:10.1017/S09545
7940900025X
Eisenberg, N., Cumberland, A., Spinrad, T. L., Fabes, R. A., Shepard, S. A., Reiser,
M., . . . Guthrie, I. K. (2001). The relations of regulation and emotionality to
children’s externalizing and internalizing problem behavior. Child Devel-
opment, 72(4), 1112–1134. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00337
Eisenberg, N., Gershoff, E. T., Fabes, R. A., Shepard, S. A., Cumberland, A. J.,
Losoya, S. H., . . . Murphy, B. C. (2001). Mother’s emotional expressivity and
children’s behavior problems and social competence: Mediation through
children’s regulation. Developmental Psychology, 37(4), 475–490. doi:10
.1037/0012-1649.37.4.475
Eisenberg, N., Guthrie, I. K., Fabes, R. A., Reiser, M., Murphy, B. C., Holgren, R., . . .
Losoya, S. (1997). The relations of regulation and emotionality to resiliency
and competent social functioning in elementary school children. Child
Development, 68(2), 295–311. doi:10.2307/1131851
Eisenberg, N., Haugen, R., Spinrad, T. L., Hofer, C., Chassin, L., Zhou, Q., . . . Liew,
J. (2010). Relations of temperament to maladjustment and ego resiliency in
at-risk children. Social Development, 19(3), 577–600. doi:10.1111/j.1467
-9507.2009.00550.x
Eisenberg, N., Hofer, C., Sulik, M. J., & Spinrad, T. L. (2014). Self-regulation, effortful
control, and their socioemotional correlates. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of
emotion regulation (2nd ed., pp. 157–172). New York: Guilford Press.
Eisenberg, N., Pidada, S., & Liew, J. (2001). The relations of regulation and negative
emotionality to Indonesian children’s social functioning. Child Develop-
ment, 72(6), 1747–1763. doi:/10.1111/1467-8624.00376
Eisenberg, N., Sadovsky, A., & Spinrad, T. (2005). Associations among emotion-
related regulation, language skills, emotion knowledge, and academic
outcomes. New Directions in Child and Adolescent Development, 109, 109–

118. doi:10.1002/cd.143
Eisenberg, N., Sadovsky, A., Spinrad, T. L., Fabes, R. A., Losoya, S. H., Valiente,
C., . . . Shepard, S. A. (2005). The relations of problem behavior status to
children’s negative emotionality, effortful control, and impulsivity: Concur-
rent relations and prediction of change. Developmental Psychology, 41(1),
193–211. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.41.1.193
Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Eggum, N. D. (2010). Emotion-related self-regulation
and its relation to c hildren’s maladjustment. Annual Review of Clinical Psy
chology, 6, 495–525. doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131208
Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Fabes, R. A., Reiser, M., Cumberland, A., Shepard,
S. A., . . . Thompson, M. (2004). The relations of effortful control and impul-
sivity to children’s resiliency and adjustment. Child Development, 75(1),
25–46. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00652.x
Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Morris, A. S. (2002). Regulation, resiliency, and
quality of social functioning. Self and Identity, 1(2), 121–128. doi:10.1080
/152988602317319294
Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., Fabes, R. A., Smith, C. L., Reiser, M., Shepard, S. A., . . .
Cumberland, A. J. (2003). The relations of effortful control and ego control
to c hildren’s resiliency and social functioning. Developmental Psychology,
39(4), 761–776. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.4.761
Espy, K. A., McDiarmid, M. M., Cwik, M. F., Stalets, M. M., Hamby, A., & Senn, T. E.
(2004). The contribution of executive functions to emergent mathematic
skills in preschool children. Developmental Neuropsychology, 26(1), 465–486.
doi:10.1207/s15326942dn2601_6
Flores, E., Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (2005). Predictors of resilience in mal-
treated and nonmaltreated Latino children. Developmental Psychology,
41(2), 338–351. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.41.2.338
Fredrickson, B. L., & Losada, M. F. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynam-
ics of h uman flourishing. American Psychologist, 60(7), 678–686. doi:10
.1037/0003-066X.60.7.678
Funder, D. C., & Block, J. (1989). The role of ego-control, ego-resiliency, and IQ in
delay of gratification in adolescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psy
chology, 57(6), 1041–1050. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1041
Graziano, P. A., Reavis, R. D., Keane, S. P., & Calkins, S. D. (2007). The role of emo-
tion regulation in children’s early academic success. Journal of School Psy
chology, 45(1), 3–19. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.002
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher–child relationships and the tra-
jectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Devel-
opment, 72(2), 625–638. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00301
Hart, D., Keller, M., Edelstein, W., & Hofmann, V. (1998). Childhood personality
influences on social-cognitive development: A longitudinal study. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1278–1289. doi:10.1037/0022
-3514.74.5.1278
Hennighausen, K. H., Hauser, S. T., Billings, R. L., Schultz, L. H., & Allen, J. P. (2004).
Adolescent ego-development trajectories and young adult relationship
outcomes. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 24(1), 29–44. doi:10.1177/027

2431603260920
Hofer, C., Eisenberg, N., & Reiser, M. (2010). The role of socialization, effortful con-
trol, and ego resiliency in French adolescents’ social functioning. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 20(3), 555–582. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010
.00650.x
Howse, R. B., Lange, G., Farran, D. C., & Boyles, C. D. (2003). Motivation and self-
regulation as predictors of achievement in economically disadvantaged
young children. Journal of Experimental Education, 71(2), 151–174. doi:10
.1080/00220970309602061
Iyer, R. V., Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., Eisenberg, N., & Thompson, M. (2010). Peer vic-
timization and effortful control: Relations to school engagement and aca-
demic achievement. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 56(3), 361–387. doi:10.1353/
mpq.0.0058
Juffer, F., Stams, G.-J. J. M., & van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (2004). A dopted c hildren’s
problem behavior is significantly related to their ego resiliency, ego control,
and sociometric status. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(4),
697–706. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00264.x
Kim, Y. J., Cho, Y.-A., & Kim, H. A. (2015). A mediation effect of ego resiliency
between stresses and m ental health of North Korean refugee youth in South
Korea. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 32(5), 481–490. doi:10.1007/
s10560-015-0385-5
Kim-Spoon, J., Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (2013). A longitudinal study of emo-
tion regulation, emotion lability-negativity, and internalizing symptomatol-
ogy in maltreated and nonmaltreated children. Child Development, 84(2),
512–527. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01857.x
Kochanska, G., Barry, R. A., Aksan, N., & Boldt, L. J. (2008). A developmental model
of maternal and child contributions to disruptive conduct: The first six
years. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(11), 1220–1227.
Kochanska, G., Murray, K. T., & Harlan, E. T. (2000). Effortful control in early child-
hood: Continuity and change, antecedents, and implications for social
development. Developmental Psychology, 36(2), 220–232. doi:10.1037/0012
-1649.36.2.220
Kopystynska, O., Spinrad, T. L., Seay, D. M., & Eisenberg, N. (2016). The interplay
of maternal sensitivity and gentle control when predicting c hildren’s sub-
sequent academic functioning: Evidence of mediation by effortful con-
trol. Developmental Psychology, 52(6), 909–921. doi:10.1037/dev0000122
Kwok, O.-M., Hughes, J. N., & Luo, W. (2007). Role of resilient personality on lower
achieving first grade students’ current and f uture achievement. Journal of
School Psychology, 45(1), 61–82. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.07.002
Ladd, G. W., Birch, S. H., & Buhs, E. S. (1999). Children’s social and scholastic lives
in kindergarten: Related spheres of influence? Child Development, 70(6),
1373–1400. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00101
Ladd, G. W., Buhs, E. S., & Seid, M. (2000). C hildren’s initial sentiments about kin-
dergarten: Is school liking an antecedent of early classroom participation
and achievement? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 46(2), 255–279.
Ladd, G. W., & Burgess, K. B. (2001). Do relational risks and protective factors mod-
erate the linkages between childhood aggression and early psychological
and school adjustment? Child Development, 72(5), 1579–1601. doi:10.1111
/1467-8624.00366
Ladd, G. W., & Dinella, L. M. (2009). Continuity and change in early school engage-
ment: Predictive of children’s achievement trajectories from first to eighth
grade? Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 190–206. doi:10.1037/
a0013153
Larose, S., & Bernier, A. (2001). Social support processes: Mediators of attachment
state of mind and adjustment in late adolescence. Attachment & H uman
Development, 3(1), 96–120. doi:10.1080/14616730010024762
Lengua, L. J. (2006). Growth in temperament and parenting as predictors of adjust-
ment during children’s transition to adolescence. Developmental Psychol
ogy, 42(5), 819–832. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.819
Lengua, L. J., Moran, L., Zalewski, M., Ruberry, E., Kiff, C., & Thompson, S. (2014).
Relations of growth in effortful control to family income, cumulative risk,
and adjustment in preschool-age c hildren. Journal of Abnormal Child Psy
chology. doi:10.1007/s10802-014-9941-2
Liew, J., McTigue, E. M., Barrois, L., & Hughes, J. N. (2008). Adaptive and effortful
control and academic self-efficacy beliefs on achievement: A longitudinal
study of 1st through 3rd graders. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.07.003
Li-Grining, C. (2007). Effortful control among low-income preschoolers in three
cities: Stability, change, and individual differences. Developmental Psychol
ogy, 43(1), 208–221. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.1.208
Luthar, S. S. (2006). Resilience in development: A synthesis of research across five
decades. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathol-
ogy: Vol. 3. Risk, disorder, and adaptation (2nd ed., pp. 739–795). Hoboken,
NJ: Wiley.
Magnus, K. B., Cowen, E. L., Wyman, P. A., Fagen, D. B., & Work, W. C. (1999).
Correlates of resilient outcomes among highly stressed African-American
and White urban children. Journal of Community Psychology, 27(4), 473–
488. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629(199907)27:4<473:AID-JCOP8>3.0.CO;2-8
Martel, M. M., Nigg, J. T., Wong, M. M., Fitzgerald, H. E., Jester, J. M., Puttler,
L. I., . . . Zucker, R. A. (2007). Childhood and adolescent resiliency, regula-
tion, and executive functioning in relation to adolescent problems and com-
petence in a high-risk sample. Development and Psychopathology, 19(2),
541–563. doi:10.1017/S0954579407070265
Masten, A. S. (2014). Ordinary magic: Resilience in development. New York: Guil-
ford Press.
McClelland, M. M., & Cameron, C. E. (2012). Self-regulation in early childhood:
Improving conceptual clarity and developing ecologically valid measures.
Child Development Perspectives, 6(2), 136–142. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606
.2011.00191.x
McClelland, M. M., Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Farris, C. L., Jewkes, A. M., &
Morrison, F. J. (2007). Links between behavioral regulation and preschool-
ers’ literacy, vocabulary, and math skills. Developmental Psychology, 43(4),
947–959. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.4.947
Merz, E. C., Landry, S. H., Williams, J. M., Barnes, M. A., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad,
T. L., . . . Clancy-Menchetti, J. (2014). Associations among parental education,
home environment quality, effortful control, and preacademic knowledge.
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 35(4), 304–315. doi:10.1016/j
.appdev.2014.04.002
Milioni, M., Alessandri, G., Eisenberg, N., Castellani, V., Zuffianò, A., Vecchione,
M., & Caprara, G. V. (2015). Reciprocal relations between emotional self-
efficacy beliefs and ego-resiliency across time. Journal of Personality, 83(5),
552–563. doi:10.1111/jopy.12131
Morris, A. S., John, A., Halliburton, A. L., Morris, M. D. S., Robinson, L. R., Myers,
S. S., . . . Terranova, A. (2013). Effortful control, behavior problems, and peer
relations: What predicts academic adjustment in kindergartners from low-
income families? Early Education and Development, 24(6), 813–828. doi:
10.1080/10409289.2013.744682
Murphy, B. C., Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Shepard, S., & Guthrie, I. K. (1999). Con-
sistency and change in c hildren’s emotionality and regulation: A longitudi-
nal study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45(3), 413–444.
Murray, K. T., & Kochanska, G. (2002). Effortful control: F actor structure and rela-
tion to externalizing and internalizing behaviors. Journal of Abnormal
Child Psychology, 30(5), 503–514. doi:10.1023/A:1019821031523
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (2003). Do c hildren’s attention pro
cesses mediate the link between family predictors and school readiness?
Developmental Psychology, 39(3), 581–593. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.3.581
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (2004). Trajectories of physical
aggression from toddlerhood to m iddle childhood: Predictors, correlates,
and outcomes. SRCD Monographs, 69(4), 1–146.
Oshri, A., Rogosch, F. A., Burnette, M. L., & Cicchetti, D. (2011). Developmental
pathways to adolescent cannabis abuse and dependence: Child maltreat-
ment, emerging personality, and internalizing versus externalizing psy-
chopathology. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 25(4), 634–644. doi:10
.1037/a0023151
Oshri, A., Rogosch, F. A., & Cicchetti, D. (2013). Child maltreatment and mediat-
ing influences of childhood personality types on the development of ado-
lescent psychopathology. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent
Psychology, 42(3), 287–301. doi:10.1080/15374416.2012.715366
Palermo, F., Hanish, L. D., Martin, C. L., Fabes, R. A., & Reiser, M. (2007). Pre-
schoolers’ academic readiness: What role does the teacher-child relation-
ship play? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22(4), 407–422. doi:10.1016/j.
ecresq.2007.04.002
Park, N. (2004). Character strengths and positive youth development. Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591, 40–54. doi:10
.1177/0002716203260079
Parker, G. R., Cowen, E. L., Work, W. C., & Wyman, P. A. (1990). Test correlates of
stress resilience among urban school c hildren. The Journal of Primary Pre-
vention, 11(1), 19–35. doi:10.1007/BF01324859
Philippe, F. L., Laventure, S., Beaulieu-Pelletier, G., Lecours, S., & Lekes, N. (2011).
Ego-resiliency as a mediator between childhood trauma and psychological
symptoms. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30(6), 583–598.

doi:10.1521/jscp.2011.30.6.583
Pianta, R. C., & Stuhlman, M. W. (2004). Teacher-child relationships and c hildren’s
success in the first years of school. School Psychology Review, 33(3),
444–458.
Ponitz, C. C., McClelland, M. M., Matthews, J. S., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). A struc-
tured observation of behavioral self-regulation and its contribution to kin-
dergarten outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 605–619. doi:10.1037/
a0015365
Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (1998). Attention, self-regulation, and conscious-
ness. Transactions of the Philosophical Society of London, B, 1915–1927.
Raver, C. C. (2002). Emotions M atter: Making the case for the role of young
children’s emotional development for early school readiness. Social Policy
Report, Society for Research in Child Development, 16, 3–18.
Raver, C. C. (2004). Placing emotional self-regulation in sociocultural and socio-
economic contexts. Child Development, 75(2), 346-353. doi:10.1111/j.1467
-8624.2004.00676.x
Rhoades, B. L., Warren, H. K., Domitrovich, C. E., & Greenberg, M. T. (2011).
Examining the link between preschool social–emotional competence
and first grade academic achievement: The role of attention skills. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(2), 182–191. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.07
.003
Robins, R. W., John, O. P., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1996).
Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled boys: Three replicable per-
sonality types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 157–171.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.157
Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (2006). Temperament. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon,
& R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional,
and personality development (6th ed., pp. 99–166). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Rudasill, K. M., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. (2009). Teacher–child relationship quality:
The roles of child temperament and teacher–child interactions. Early Child-
hood Research Quarterly, 24(2), 107–120. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.12.003
Shields, A., & Cicchetti, D. (1997). Emotion regulation among school-age children:
The development and validation of a new criterion Q-sort scale. Develop-
mental Psychology, 33(6), 906–916. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.6.906
Shonk, S. M., & Cicchetti, D. (2001). Maltreatment, competency deficits, and risk
for academic and behavioral maladjustment. Developmental Psychology,
37(1), 3–17. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.37.1.3
Silva, K. M., Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Sulik, M. J., Valiente, C., Huerta, S., . . .
Taylor, H. B. (2011). Relations of c hildren’s effortful control and teacher-
child relationship quality to school attitudes in a low-income sample. Early
Education and Development, 22(3), 434–460. doi:10.1080/10409289.2011.
578046
Smeekens, S., Riksen-Walraven, J. M., & van Bakel, H. J. A. (2008). Profiles of com-
petence and adaptation in preschoolers as related to the quality of parent-
child interaction. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(6), 1490–1499.
doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2008.06.012
Spear, L. P. (2000). The adolescent brain and age-related behavioral manifestations.

Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 24(4), 417–463. doi:10.1016/
S0149-7634(00)00014-2
Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Cumberland, A., Fabes, R. A., Valiente, C., Shepard,
S. A., . . . Guthrie, I. K. (2006). Relation of emotion-related regulation to
children’s social competence: A longitudinal study. Emotion, 6(3), 498–510.
doi:10.1037/1528-3542.6.3.498
Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Gaertner, B., Popp, T., Smith, C. L., Kupfer, A., . . .
Hofer, C. (2007). Relations of maternal socialization and toddlers’ effortful
control to children’s adjustment and social competence. Developmental Psy
chology, 43(5), 1170–1186. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.5.1170
Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Silva, K. M., Eggum, N. D., Reiser, M., Edwards, A., . . .
Gaertner, B. M. (2012). Longitudinal relations among maternal behaviors,
effortful control and young c hildren’s committed compliance. Developmen-
tal Psychology, 48(2), 552–566. doi:10.1037/a0025898
Sulik, M. J., Huerta, S., Zerr, A. A., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Valiente, C., . . .
Taylor, H. B. (2010). The f actor structure of effortful control and measure
ment invariance across ethnicity and sex in a high-risk sample. Journal of
Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 32(1), 8–22. doi:10.1007/
s10862-009-9164-y
Swanson, J., Valiente, C., & Lemery-Chalfant, K. (2012). Predicting academic
achievement from cumulative home risk: The mediating roles of effortful
control, academic relationships, and school avoidance. Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 58(3), 375–408. doi:10.1353/mpq.2012.0014
Swanson, J., Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., & O’Brien, T. C. (2011). Predicting
early adolescents’ academic achievement, social competence, and physical
health from parenting, ego resilience, and engagement coping. The Journal
of Early Adolescence, 31(4), 548–576. doi:10.1177/0272431610366249
Taylor, Z. E., Doane, L. D., & Eisenberg, N. (2014). Transitioning from high school
to college: Relations of social support, ego-resiliency, and maladjustment
during emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 2(2), 105–115.
doi:10.1177/2167696813506885
Taylor, Z. E., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Widaman, K. F. (2013). Longitudinal
relations of intrusive parenting and effortful control to ego-resiliency dur-
ing early childhood. Child Development, 84(4), 1145–1151.
Taylor, Z. E., Eisenberg, N., VanSchyndel, S. K., Eggum-Wilkens, N. D., & Spinrad,
T. L. (2014). Children’s negative emotions and ego-resiliency: Longitudinal
relations with social competence. Emotion, 14(2), 397–406. doi:10.1037/
a0035079
Trask-Tate, A., Cunningham, M., & Lang-DeGrange, L. (2010). The importance of
family: The impact of social support on symptoms of psychological distress
in African American girls. Research in H uman Development, 7(3), 164–182.
doi:10.1080/15427609.2010.504458
Ursache, A., Blair, C., & Raver, C. C. (2012). The promotion of self-regulation as a
means of enhancing school readiness and early achievement in children at
risk for school failure. Child Development Perspectives, 6(2), 122-128.
doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00209.x
Valiente, C., Eisenberg, N., Haugen, R., Spinrad, T. L., Hofer, C., Liew, J., & Kupfer,
A. (2011). Children’s effortful control and academic achievement: Media-
tion through social functioning. Early Education and Development, 22(3),
411–433. doi:10.1080/10409289.2010.505259
Valiente, C., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Haugen, R., Thompson, M. S., & Kupfer,
A. (2013). Effortful control and impulsivity as concurrent and longitudinal
predictors of academic achievement. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 33(7),
946–972. doi:10.1177/0272431613477239
Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., & Castro, K. S. (2007). C hildren’s effortful con-
trol and academic competence: Mediation through school liking. Merrill-
Palmer Quarterly, 53(1), 1–25. doi:10.1353/mpq.2007.0006
Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., Swanson, J., & Reiser, M. (2008). Prediction of
children’s academic competence from their effortful control, relationships,
and classroom participation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1),
67–77. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.67
Valiente, C., Swanson, J., Lemery-Chalfant, K., & Berger, R. H. (2014). Children’s
effortful control and academic achievement: Do relational peer victimiza-
tion and classroom participation operate as mediators? Journal of School
Psychology, 52(4), 433–445. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2014.05.005
Van Aken, M. A. (1992). The development of general competence and domain-
specific competencies. European Journal of Personality, 6(4), 267–282.
doi:10.1002/per.2410060403
VanSchyndel, S. K., Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., & Spinrad, T. L. (2017). Relations
from temperamental approach reactivity and effortful control to academic
achievement and peer relations in early elementary school. Journal of
Research in Personality, 67, 15–26. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2015.12.001
Welsh, M., Parke, R. D., Widaman, K., & O’Neil, R. (2001). Linkages between
children’s social and academic competence: A longitudinal analysis. Journal
of School Psychology, 39(6), 463–482. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(01)0 0084-X
Williford, A. P., Maier, M. F., Downer, J. T., Pianta, R. C., & Howes, C. (2013). Under-
standing how c hildren’s engagement and teachers’ interactions combine to
predict school readiness. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,
34(6), 299–309. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2013.05.002
Willson, V. L., & Hughes, J. N. (2006). Retention of Hispanic/Latino students in
first grade: Child, parent, teacher, school, and peer predictors. Journal of
School Psychology, 44(1), 31–49. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2005.12.001
Zhou, Q., Lengua, L. J., & Wang, Y. (2009). The relations of temperament reactiv-
ity and effortful control to children’s adjustment problems in China and the
United States. Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 724–739.
Zhou, Q., Main, A., & Wang, Y. (2010). The relations of temperamental effortful con-
trol and anger/frustration to Chinese c hildren’s academic achievement and
social adjustment: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology,
102(1), 180–196.
8
Building Positive Relationships with
Adolescents in Educational Contexts:
Principles and Practices for Educators in
School and Community-Based Settings
Gretchen Brion-Meisels, Jessica Fei, and Deepa Vasudevan
We [the teacher and I] had some type of relationship. We could joke

around, laugh at each other all the time. It w
asn’t only just teach me
what I had to know and then I leave the class the next day. It was like,
I want you to succeed in life. I want you to do better. I want you to be
better than me. That’s why I come here.
—High school student
If someone asks me my real secret . . . it’s that I love my students, and
I believe in their possibilities unconditionally. I see only what they can
become.
—Principal Cliatt-Wayman1
145
A SHIFT TOWARD THE POSITIVE: THE POWER

OF RELATIONSHIPS WITH ADOLESCENTS
Positive relationships with adults play a central role in the social, emo-
tional, and cognitive development of children and adolescents. Whereas
young c hildren often rely on their relationships with family and close care-
takers, adolescents’ developmental trajectories are influenced by a variety
of relationships outside of their family unit (Sameroff, 2010). This is partic-
ularly true in contexts like the United States, where independence is val-
ued as a symbol of adulthood, and the navigation of institutions requires
diverse knowledge and guidance. Adolescents seek out many kinds of rela-
tionships for support, including ones with classmates, friends, teachers,
mentors, counselors, youth workers, and other nonfamilial adults. These
relationships have the potential to influence identity construction, sense of
belonging, decision making, and aspirations in both positive and negative
ways. In any educational context, positive relationships—defined here as
relationships characterized by low levels of conflict and high levels of close-
ness and support (Rimm-Kaufman & Sandilos, 2016)—have the power to
foster trust, self-esteem, critical thinking, and community. These relation-
ships support the work of positive psychology by helping adults learn about
and build on students’ strengths, fostering the collective efficacy of individ-
uals within a setting.
Although research suggests that “positivity” must be part of the process
of relationship building as much as it is a desirable outcome, there is scarce
research or practical guidance on positivity as an independent set of mech-
anisms that can nourish relationships (Reis & Gable, 2003).2 Adolescents, in
particular, historically have been described and approached from a deficit
lens (e.g., Lesko, 1996; Nakkula & Toshalis, 2006). G. Stanley Hall (1904)—
often credited with coining the term adolescence—described the period as
“one of storm and stress,” writing that adolescents are “abandoned to joy,
grief, passion, fear, and rage. They are bashful, show off, weep, laugh, desire,
are curious, eager, regret and swell with passion” (v. II, p. 60). Popular por-
trayals of adolescents in the media often focus on their propensity for risk
taking, their low levels of impulse control, and the frequency of their mis-
behavior. This deficit and problem-based approach is particularly pervasive
in educational programming targeted for adolescents of color, who are often
deemed “at risk” (Baldridge, 2014). Fortunately, over the last 20 years,
researchers have provided extensive support for the importance of adopt-
ing a strengths-based approach to both working with youth and portraying
their experiences (e.g., Bolier et al., 2013; Rashid et al., 2013; W
aters, 2011;
Zimmerman, 2013). Their argument echoes central tenets of positive psy
chology by suggesting that rather than focusing on what adolescents are
doing wrong, it is worth focusing on their strengths—both individual and
Positive Relationships with Adolescents in Educational Contexts 147
collective—and building on t hese strengths to support their well-being and

ongoing development.
When relationships are strong and positive, they support the healthy
development of children and youth (Brion-Meisels & Jones, 2012; Bronfen-
brenner, 1977, 1995; Luthar, 2006; Rimm-Kaufman & Sandilos, 2016; Sam-
eroff & Chandler, 1975; Sameroff, 2009, 2010). Positive relationships foster
opportunities for learning and growth, and provide the social support
needed to persist through difficult experiences. Interactions with o thers
drive much of our cognitive, social, emotional, and moral development.
3 4 5 6
Through exchanges with the p eople and objects in our environments, we

learn new ways of thinking about, responding to, and acting on the world.
Further, research suggests that positive relationships are protective in the
context of risk: individuals with positive relationships are better able to cope
with both everyday stress and heightened, or toxic, stress (Taylor, 2011;
Wills, 1991). Thus, while positive relationships support mental health, pos-
itive psychology supports the development of positive relationships by
reminding us to focus our attention on the goodness contained within our
interactions (Reis & Gable, 2003).
Adults in school and community-based settings play a unique role in
supporting the experiences of adolescents outside of their homes (Hirsch,
2005). Research suggests that in school settings, a strong, positive relation-
ship with an educator can significantly improve academic and behav-
ioral outcomes (e.g., Baker, 2006; Gallagher, 2013; Hamre & Pianta, 2001;
Roorda et al., 2011). Even one strong, positive relationship can increase
a young person’s sense of belonging to a school community and provide
valuable support in times of stress (Rimm-Kaufman & Sandilos, 2016). In
community-based settings, research suggests that strong, positive adult
mentors can improve social and emotional outcomes for youth (DuBois &
Silverthorn, 2005), and that parents and after school adult caretakers can
be critically important in providing social support for m iddle school and
high school students at risk of academic failure (Richman, Rosenfeld, &
Bowen, 1998). Recognizing this, theoretical models of positive youth devel-
opment are explicit about the importance of consistent, supportive relation-
ships with adults (e.g., Mahoney, Schmeder & Stattin, 2005; Nakkula &
Toshalis, 2006; Scales & Leffert, 2004).
In the last decade, t here has been growing attention to c hildren and ado-
lescents within the literature on positive psychology (Linley & Proctor,
2013). For example, researchers have developed and studied curriculum
that teach well-being and focus on students’ strengths, finding that t hese
classroom interventions increase students’ life satisfaction, promote their
learning and engagement, and support creative thinking skills (e.g., Seligman,
Ernst, Gillham, Reivich & Linkins, 2009). Scholars have also argued that
well-being should be considered a central aim of education (e.g., White,
2011), and that to accomplish this aim, schools must equip students with
relational skills (Morris, 2013). Still, despite recognition of the importance
of relationships as a source of life satisfaction and emotional well-being
(Reis & Gable, 2003), the development of positive relationships between
adults and adolescents remains an understudied area in positive psychol
ogy. Therefore, the current chapter draws on research from across multiple
disciplines to deepen understandings of how adults can build relationships
with adolescents that enrich subjective experience and strengthen institu-
tions and communities. We show how positive partnerships between adults
and adolescents can contribute to the “flourishing and optimal function-
ing of people, groups, and institutions” (Gable & Haidt, 2005, p. 104) in the
field of education specifically.
Although forming healthy relationships with adolescents is innate to
the work of educators, we have found that instructional and programmatic
demands can overshadow and subsume this critical component of educa-
tional activities. Unfortunately, we often encounter an assumption that
educators already have the “gift” of connecting to young p eople. This
assumption flattens the complexity of adult-youth relationships, overlooks
existing best practices that can help educators support youth, and ignores the
shifting cultural and societal dynamics that influence young p eople’s lives.
Additionally, sometimes the most needed relationships—relationships with
adolescents who have experienced emotional, sexual, or physical abuse,
for example—can be the ones that are most challenging for adult mentors
to initiate and sustain (Grossman & Rhodes, 2002). In light of outcome-
oriented demands on educators, misleading assumptions about innate
expertise, and consistent societal changes impacting young p eople’s lives,
we believe educators must have the time and resources to consider the
underlying values, knowledge, and skills that foster positive relationships.
This chapter outlines a set of principles and practices to support educa-
tors in schools and community-based programs in fostering positive part-
nerships with adolescents, a commitment that we believe both stems
from—and contributes to—the field of positive psychology. We use the term
partnerships intentionally to suggest that adolescents are, themselves, crit-
ical stakeholders in creating positive relationships. The chapter begins with
a further review of key research on the importance of relationships in sup-
porting adolescent development, noting that positive relationships with
adolescents often look different depending on the context in which they
occur. Using Sameroff and Chandler’s (1975) transactional model of devel-
opment as a framework for thinking about positive relationships in educa-
tional contexts, we then describe a set of interpersonal and structural
practices that underlie most positive relationships with adolescents. Here,
we provide examples and suggestions for practitioners seeking to build
positive relationships with adolescents in schools and community-based
programs. We conclude with implications for researchers and practition

ers seeking to better support positive relationships in educational spaces.
POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS FOSTER SOCIAL, EMOTIONAL

AND COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
Positive relationships play a unique and essential role in the lives of ado-
lescents. As children transition into adulthood, they must learn to balance
the contextual and cultural norms of their environments with their grow-
ing sense of self. Although t here are different cultural norms and social
demands across contexts, the transition from living as a child to operating
as an adult is typically marked by increased expectations and responsibili-
ties. For this reason, developmental scientists have long described adoles-
cence as a period of critical growth. Since the transition to adolescence is
often marked by a decrease in the extent to which caregivers mediate
relationships, young p eople must develop an ability to “read” situations and
predict appropriate and effective emotional and behavioral reactions for
specific contexts. Schools and community-based settings provide impor
tant opportunities for children to practice positive relational skills with
the support of nonfamilial adult caregivers. As adolescents transition away
from the gaze of their primary caregivers, adults outside the home can pro-
vide valuable models, scaffolding, and support.
There is extensive evidence of the ways in which strong positive rela-
tionships with adults and peers outside the home can support healthy
adolescent development (Halpern, 2013; Nakkula & Toshalis, 2006;
Rimm-Kaufman & Sandilos, 2016; Scales & Leffert, 2004). As Halpern
(2013) writes, “Young p eople may not want to be predefined or pigeonholed;
they may want and need some control over their own decisions and choices.
But they also need—and, as they mature, increasingly want—exposure to a
range of adults and a variety of kinds of adult support” (p. 31). Although
there are many reasons why positive relationships benefit adolescent devel-
opment, we highlight two h ere.
First, positive relationships provide opportunities for adolescents to
explore and expand their ideas and identities. This exploration can happen
in many ways, including learning new skills, being exposed to new per-
spectives, practicing new ways of communicating, adopting new values or
beliefs, and envisioning new possible selves via exposure to role models
(Halpern, 2013). Psychologist James Marcia (1980) describes adolescence as
a time of both crisis and commitment, in which individuals question old
ways of being and explore new ones. Although many adults cycle through
stages of crisis and commitment over the course of a lifespan, Marcia and
others suggest that the process of questioning, exploring, and committing
are particularly salient during adolescence, as individuals seek to define and

articulate their place in adult society. Nakkula and Toshalis (2006) build on
this idea by referring to adolescents as “theorists”: actors experimenting on
the world in an effort to learn more about themselves and their environ-
ments. Given the type of exploration common for adolescents, adults can
offer valuable guidance as well as provide “models of personhood” (Halpern,
2013, p. 32). Relationships offer opportunities to develop new theories and
experiment on them.
Second, positive relationships provide adolescents with necessary social
support in times of stress (Shonkoff et al., 2012; Taylor, 2011), w hether this
stress is caused by internal crisis (e.g., identity exploration) or external
factors (e.g., poverty). As young p eople move t oward adulthood, they face the
everyday stress of developing friendships and romantic relationships, persist-
ing through and achieving in school, and navigating cultural expectations of
their families and communities. When compounded with additional factors
such as poverty, systemic inequality and discrimination, illness, and f amily
conflict, these realities can cause chronic stress for adolescents (Shonkoff
et al., 2012). Because structural inequality has a disproportionately negative
impact on adolescents of color, immigrant youth, youth from low-income
backgrounds, sexuality minority youth, and gender non-conforming youth,
these adolescents often experience heightened levels of toxic stress (Colten &
Gore, 1991; Ginwright, 2015; Goodman, McEwen, Dolan, Schafer-Kalkhoff, &
Adler, 2005). For example, Gonzales and Chavez (2012) describe the addi-
tional stress and trauma that undocumented adolescents experience as they
navigate the transition to adulthood due to their legal status, such as: limi-
tations on travel, difficulties acquiring a driving license, barriers to apply-
ing to college and financial aid, and challenges in finding work. By providing
opportunities to theorize in addition to support during this process, posi-
tive relationships foster healthy development.
THE RECIPROCAL INTERACTION BETWEEN

CONTEXT AND RELATIONSHIPS
Just as relationships shape development, so too do contexts (space, time,
location, and culture) shape relationships. H umans develop in constant
interaction with their environments, nested in a set of systems that shift
over time (Bronfenbrenner, 1977; Sameroff, 2010). Whereas young children
interact most often with their primary caregivers in the contexts of home
and/or school, adolescents often traverse multiple contexts in the course of
a day. Developmental theorists refer to interactions that are both consistent
and persistent as “proximal processes” (Bronfenbrenner, 1995, p. 620).
Proximal processes represent continuous, dynamic interactions between
individuals and the experiences that emerge from their social settings
(Sameroff, 2009). The effects of proximal processes are considered bidirec-

tional: the environment influences the individual, just as the individual
influences the environment. Given the nature of proximal processes, con-
text both shapes and is shaped by human interactions (Sameroff, 2009;
Sameroff & Chandler, 1975).
On a macrolevel, context shapes adolescents’ needs and desires, which
shape how they hope to be treated in relationships. In her description of an
ecological model of social support, Tietjen (1989) suggests that the compe-
tency demands of a particular cultural context shape the types of support
necessary in that context. In other words, the types of skills and understand-
ings that adolescents will need, as adults, are shaped by the cultural context
in which they live. Th ese competencies, in turn, influence the types of sup-
port that adolescents seek. The competency demands placed on adolescents
within particular contexts thus directly influence the specific qualities asso-
ciated with positive relationships in t hese contexts. For example, research
on adolescents in the United States suggests that young people often crave
relationships where they feel trusted, feel a sense of belonging, feel that their
perspectives and voices are respected, feel able to access support, and feel
as though they have autonomy or choice (Brion-Meisels, 2014, 2016; Martin,
Romas, Medford, Leffert & Hatcher, 2006). Th ese specific qualities of
positive relationships are culturally bound: in the United States, autonomy,
belonging, and respect are dominant cultural values; having autonomy and
respect, in particular, are often seen as signs of adulthood (Halpern, 2013).
At a local level, the relationship between contexts and relationships is
often iterative. Individual behaviors can change the climate of a family,
classroom, or neighborhood setting, just as the culture and structures of a
setting can change the behaviors of individuals. In adolescence, factors such
as depression, anxiety, substance abuse, physical illness, and learning dis-
abilities can cause stress in both home and school contexts, impacting the
nature of relationships between youth and adult caretakers. At the same
time, persistent interactions with environments that are discriminatory,
abusive, or dysfunctional can cause adolescents to experience additional
challenges with m ental and physical health.7 Because interactions are recip-
rocal and iterative in this way, understanding positive relationships requires
understanding both the interpersonal interactions involved in these rela-
tionships and the contexts in which t hese relationships occur.
CRITICAL DIMENSIONS OF POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS

Although the specific qualities of positive relationships vary across eco-
logical and developmental contexts, several dimensions of relationships
support development universally. We argue that positive relationships work
best when they are developmentally appropriate, contextually and cultur-
ally relevant, reciprocal, and reliable (Brion-Meisels & Jones, 2012).8 Because
we believe that these dimensions can be actualized differently depending

on contextual demands, below we summarize t hese relational elements in
general terms. In the next section, we provide specific ideas about the prac-
tices that adults can use to foster t hese relational elements.
Developmentally appropriate. One of the most important qualities of
positive relationships is that they are developmentally appropriate. Rela-
tional needs change dramatically between birth and adolescence. In e very
society, the demands placed on children and adults vary to reflect the
physical, cognitive, and emotional capacities that children develop over
time. Positive relationships adjust to these varying tasks, are sensitive to
individual needs, and, in the case of adolescents, help them prepare for
adulthood. For example, in the United States caregivers may support a tod-
dler’s development of relational skills by modeling the use of language to
identify emotional states, but would likely support adolescents’ relation-
ships by encouraging the use of conflict resolution strategies. Similarly, the
extent to which adults supervise c hildren’s play changes significantly over
time. Positive relationships adjust to the capacities of children, their needs,
and desires.
Contextually and culturally relevant. Just as relationships must be
developmentally appropriate, so too must they be contextually and cultur-
ally relevant. B
ecause primary caregivers typically transmit cultural norms
to very young children through everyday interactions, these early relation-
ships are (by nature) contextually appropriate. However, as children get
older, they begin to interact with secondary caregivers and peers and are
required to adjust to varying expectations around communication and
behavior. Relationships are most beneficial when they are mindful of exist-
ing norms and discourses in a space, providing relevant opportunities for
learning and support.9 This does not mean that relationships cannot chal-
lenge cultural norms and practices; rather, it requires that adults are reflec-
tive about their own beliefs and assumptions, the nature of their interactions,
and the ways in which these reinforce (or challenge) setting-level norms
(Nakkula & Ravitch, 1998). As Kirshner (2015) writes, “Young people expe-
riencing oppression need more than just good mentors or academic skills;
they need opportunities to talk about challenges in their everyday lives,
examine root causes of inequality, and take action, broadly defined, about
issues that affect them” (p. 25).
Reciprocal. Relationships are interactional by nature, but positive rela-
tionships are explicitly reciprocal: they provide opportunities for each party
to influence and learn from the other. In his chapter on early social and
personality development, Thompson (2006) suggests that positive relational
experiences are “generative of new understanding, whether of emotions,
self, morality or people’s beliefs” (p. 25). Positive relationships with adoles-
cents explicitly value the knowledge that adolescents themselves hold, and
their capacity to influence society. For example, in their exploration of a

youth radio program in which youth and adults were coproducing media
content, Chavez and Soep (2005) discuss collaborative relationships
between adults and youth as a “pedagogy of collegiality” in which collegi-
ality “is a relationship of shared collective responsibility” (p. 419). This fea-
ture of positive relationships is often the most challenging b ecause it is
connected to explicit and implicit power dynamics between adults and
youth. Thus, as Chavez and Soep (2005) explore adults and youth working
together, they note “the mutual engagement, investment, and vulnerability
between young people and adults that underpin collegial pedagogy never
cancel out, nor should they obscure, the very real institutional, historical,
and cultural forces through which power circulates in any pedagogical rela-
tionship, particularly one with high stakes attached” (p. 410).
Reliable. Finally, positive relationships are reliable: as adolescents adapt
to changes in their environments over time, sustained relationships provide
critical developmental supports (Benard, 1991). Both predictability and
consistency are known to support healthy social and emotional develop-
ment. In their study of the effects of mentoring relationships on a national
sample of adolescents, DuBois and Silverthorn (2005) found that youth who
reported being in mentoring relationships characterized by consistent, pos-
itive interaction w ere more likely to report positive outcomes in terms of
education, work, or psychological well-being, and less likely to report prob
lem behaviors (see also Rhodes & DuBois, 2008). Similar benefits emerge
from sustained positive relationships with parents and teachers.
Although we believe that the dimensions of positive relationships
described above are universally applicable, we also know that context plays
a critical role in shaping the specific behaviors that adolescents interpret as
developmentally appropriate, contextually and culturally relevant, recipro-
cal and reliable. As we begin to describe the ways in which adults can
build positive relationships with adolescents, we note that the educational
spaces in which we have worked and studied are primarily U.S.-based.
INTERPERSONAL PRACTICES THAT SUPPORT POSITIVE

RELATIONSHIPS WITH ADOLESCENTS
Building on the aforementioned variables, in our work with educators
in and outside of school settings, we have found that relationships with
adolescents benefit from approaches that are strengths-based, committed
to cultural humility, responsive to students’ specific interests and needs,
partnership-oriented, and praxis-oriented. Below, we define each of these
principles, provide a few examples of supporting research, and then share
a sample of effective practices (Table 8.1).
Table 8.1 Interpersonal Practices That Support Positive Relationships with Adolescents
Principles Definition Practices
Strengths- A commitment to focus on • Avoid negative characterizations and overgeneralizations about adolescents.
based approach adolescents’ strengths—both • Focus on individuals’ strengths, defined broadly to include social, emotional,
individual and collective— cognitive, and physical skills.
rather than focusing on what • Recognize the wisdom that young p eople have and value their knowledge by
adolescents are d oing wrong; inviting it into discussions.
and, a desire to build on t hese • Celebrate every young person, and allow young people to celebrate each other.
strengths to support • Share positive feedback and stories with families and communities.
adolescents’ ongoing • Frame mistakes as opportunities for growth.
development. • Support youth to use their strengths to address challenges they face.
154
Commitment An approach to interacting • Require adult reflexivity; consider the four pillars of hermeneutic practice
to cultural with o thers that highlights (Nakkula & Ravitch, 1998).
humility (1) a lifelong commitment to • Practice listening before speaking.
learning, reflection, and • Speak from personal experience.
self-evaluation; (2) a desire to • Take risks and be explicit about your risk taking; try something new, share
recognize and challenge power pieces of your story with students, and participate when you request that
imbalances; (3) a commitment students engage in exercises requiring vulnerability.
to develop respectful • Explicitly name and discuss everyday power imbalances with youth; grapple
partnerships with people and collectively with how to shift power.
groups who advocate for • Develop partnerships with families and communities, as well as organizations
others; and (4) the demand that that advocate for o
thers; learn about the communities in which you are
institutions model equitable working.
and just practices (Tervalon & • Name the above practices as a “critical use of time” when talking to other
Murray-Garcia, 1998). adults and youth.
Responsiveness A commitment to relate to • Allow for choice in the curriculum and in daily agendas; create flexible content.
to students’ adolescents in ways that • Show that you value funds of knowledge (González, Moll, & Amanti, 2006)
specific scaffold for success, build on from families and communities by inviting this knowledge into your classroom.
interests and existing strengths and • Consider multiple learning styles when developing classroom activities; allow
needs interests, provide choice/ students to choose their entry point.
agency, and explicitly seek to • Connect the curriculum to current events or topics of interest.
build feelings of trust and • Create authentic, interactive learning experiences.
belonging. • Solicit student input about the curriculum, pedagogical approaches, and
schoolwide policies/practices.
• Build in classroom structures that allow time for checking in with youth about
the type of support they would like; this can be in writing or through quick
check-in meetings.
Partnership- A commitment to treat • Invite youth to codesign classes, programs, and professional development for
oriented adolescents as partner their teachers.
155
stakeholders in all organizations/ • Provide authentic opportunities for youth guidance/voice/input; ensure that
processes that seek to support these opportunities provide youth with the power to influence structural or
their development; a recognition systemic elements of a program or school.
of the knowledge and humanity • Collect data about students’ experiences in school.
that adolescents bring to the • Allow students to provide formative feedback to their teachers.
table. • Create democratic processes for schoolwide decisions.
Praxis-oriented A commitment to the process • Facilitate dialogue with students driven by their questions and priorities.
of acting together on our • Allow students to engage with and on the world as a part of their everyday
environments and critically activities; get outside of the textbook or classroom and engage with authentic
reflecting on these actions, in actions (or issues) in the community.
order to transform our schools • Collaborate with youth to work t oward their visions for positive change.
and communities through • Embrace the idea of adolescents as theorists (Nakkula & Toshalis, 2006).
further action and reflection.
Strengths-Based Approach
Strengths-based approaches to relationship building have proven to be
more effective than deficit orientations in many fields (Maton, Schellenbach,
Leadbetter & Solarz, 2004), including education (Lopez & Louis, 2009) and
out-of-school time programming (Mahoney et al., 2005). In our work, we
find that adopting a strengths-based approach helps to build strong, sup-
portive relationships, in part because it ensures that adults start from a
place of recognizing adolescent wisdom.
There are many ways in which adults can honor the strengths and capa-
bilities of adolescents, and thus build a foundation for positive relationships
based on mutual respect and understanding. Adults can regularly ask young
people about themselves, their interests, and their successes. Educators can
also share reflections on specific moments when they have been proud of
their students. In schools and in out-of-school time programs alike, educa-
tors can create opportunities for young people to be celebrated by the people
who are closest to them through organizing events where adolescents can
share their work with the community, or engaging in regular contact with
the families of their students. As trust is built in relationships, adults can
work with adolescents to illuminate how the strengths and capabilities they
carry can be brought to bear on challenges that they might face as they nav-
igate different environments.
It can also be helpful for adults to be explicit in challenging the deficit
lens that has been traditionally applied to youth as a social group. As an
example, in a recent critical media literacy class at a community-based
organization, an adult facilitator began her time with a group of adolescents
by critiquing negative portrayals of millennials in the mainstream media,
and by discussing examples of how young people have historically been
used as scapegoats for the issues confronting their society. Countering these
dominant constructions of young p eople as problems, the facilitator showed
videos from successful youth organizing efforts in high schools, and
expressed her belief that young p eople are a pathway through which social
transformation becomes possible. She was candid in stating that as an adult,
she lacked the kinds of knowledge and experience that the students with
her possessed. It was from this starting point that students began to see the
power inherent in their position as young media-makers, each of whom had
valuable stories and insights to contribute. By then attending closely to the
youth participants’ ideas and letting their interests guide the ensuing dis-
cussion, this adult facilitator demonstrated that the adolescents’ voices mat-
tered, and that they each deserved to be seen through the lens of their
strengths. It is worth noting that this type of approach also supports the
other principles described herein.
Commitment to Cultural Humility

Building strong relationships requires the capacity to communicate, col-
laborate, and transform conflicts with individuals whose life experiences
and cultural norms may be different than our own. This is particularly true
in U.S. public schools and community-based organizations, where adults
often do not reflect the identities of their students. Even for educators
who may share racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, or cultural experiences with
their students, the positionality of being an adult often creates a cultural
barrier. Although t here are many useful models of culturally responsive
pedagogy from which educators can draw, we wish to draw attention to
the concept of “cultural humility” (Chávez, 2010; Tervalon & Murray-
García, 1998). Cultural humility is an approach toward interacting with
others—particularly in the context of institutions—that suggests support
providers need to adopt (1) a lifelong commitment to learning, reflection, and
self-evaluation; (2) a desire to recognize and challenge power imbalances;
(3) a commitment to develop respectful partnerships with people and groups
who advocate for others; and (4) a demand that institutions model equita-
ble and just practices (Chávez, 2010; Tervalon & Murray-García, 1998;
Waters & Asbill, 2013).
Cultural humility requires recognizing the limitations of our knowledge,
examining the assumptions we make about o thers, and acknowledging our
own biases. This begins from the understanding that all individuals carry
biases—many of which have been s haped by the cultures and the contexts
in which we have lived and worked, as well as by dominant discourses in
schools and society. The goal of committing to cultural humility is not to
free ourselves of all biases, but rather to engage in a rigorous, lifelong pro
cess of learning and unlearning: we must continually articulate what we
believe and why; become conscious of how our experiences and perspec-
tives influence our interactions with young people and communities; and
hold ourselves accountable for work that orients t oward respect, equity, and
justice. There are many tools that can support t hese commitments: adults
can engage in critical self-reflection through journal entries, digital videos,
audio recordings, or photography, for example. These reflections can be kept
private or shared with colleagues similarly committed to cultural humility.
In interactions with adolescents, adults can practice cultural humility by
listening carefully to young people, with a goal of deepening understand-
ing of adolescents’ identities and experiences. No matter our level of famil-
iarity with a culture, community, or context, we cannot know the personal
histories or experiences of every individual in a group; thus, we cannot
speak for all members of any group with which we might identify. In every-
day conversations with adolescents, adults can model listening and speak-
ing for one’s self. We can also demonstrate humility by admitting when we
have mistakenly assumed something about another person or group, and

by checking in individually with anyone who may have felt misunderstood
or misrecognized by something we said or did. Acknowledging that cultural
humility is difficult work—and voicing a hope that group members can sup-
port one another in the vulnerability and risk taking that humility entails—
can help build trust and enhance authenticity in relationships between
adults and youth.
Finally, cultural humility requires working in partnership with commu-
nities. In order to build positive relationships with adolescents, adults must
build positive relationships with their families and communities. Educators
can aim to have frequent and varied interactions with students’ family mem-
bers, local advocates, and institutions that serve the interests of the local
community. Attending community festivals, supporting local businesses
and community-based organizations, and spending time in the local neigh-
borhood are all part of the process of cultural humility. At the same time,
adults must model critical reflection about the ways in which organizational
structures, policies, and practices affecting the community may be inequi-
table. By making room for this type of structural critique—and modeling
how to engage in it—adults reflect the fourth tenet of cultural humility.
Responsiveness to Students’ Specific Needs and Interests

As noted earlier in this chapter, strong, positive relationships respond to
the specific needs and interests of the individuals involved. One way to
approach responsiveness in relationships is to consider self-determination
theory, which investigates the social and contextual conditions that facili-
tate self-motivation and healthy psychological development (Ryan & Deci,
2000). Self-determination theory suggests that most individuals are moti-
vated to grow and learn when they feel competent, autonomous, and con-
nected. Adults can support these conditions by relating to adolescents in
ways that scaffold for success, build on already existing strengths and
interests, provide choice and agency in either content or approach to learn-
ing, and explicitly seek to build feelings of trust and belonging.
To accomplish t hese goals, adults must recognize and respect students’
needs and desires. In some situations, this means asking students what
types of support they want and inquiring about the learning that interests
them most. Classroom teachers often do one-on-one check-ins with stu-
dents at various points in the year, asking their students directly about what
they seek in their relationships in the classroom (e.g., types of support, fre-
quency and means of communication, kinds of feedback), as well as what
their goals are more broadly for that semester or year. A fter coming to a set
of agreements about the relationships and expectations, the teacher and
student can then work collaboratively on their relationship and can discuss
their progress, challenges, and new strategies at each subsequent check-in.
Another way to provide responsive contexts is to offer adolescents choice
and agency over their everyday activities. At the beginning of a class or a
program, adults can invite students to share examples of activities they have
enjoyed, and then integrate these ideas into the group’s activities over the
course of their time together. Educators can also engage students as facili-
tators or cofacilitators of these activities. At every class meeting, adults can
propose agendas for the day, identifying what elements of the agenda are
their own priorities and then identifying other elements where they can be
flexible about the activity; they can then invite student input on t hose activ-
ities and have the group democratically decide what to do. In addition,
within different items on the agenda, students can be given a choice about
the specific topic that t hey’ll work on, what kind of media or materials they
might use, or w hether t hey’ll work as individuals or in groups. By creating
such opportunities for adolescents to take ownership over their learning
experience, adults increase the likelihood that diverse learners w ill find
meaning and relevance in their classroom teaching. This, in turn, can fos-
ter relationships in which adolescents have the tools and opportunities to
advocate for their own needs and desires, in the classroom and beyond.
Partnership-Oriented Relationships
Too often, relationships between adults and youth are hierarchical, where
young people are perceived as empty vessels needing to be filled or as chal-
lenges needing to be guided (DeLissovoy, 2010). This is particularly true in
the field of education, where schooling is often used as an opportunity to
assimilate young p eople into dominant social and economic norms (see
Desmond & Emirbayer, 2016, for some historical context). Yet adolescents
come into educational settings with incredible wisdom and passion to share.
In fact, many of the most promising initiatives for positive social change
today are being spearheaded by adolescents and young adults (Brion-
Meisels, 2011). Just as past educational reform movements have argued that
families and community-based organizations should be considered part-
ners in school-based work, we argue that adolescents themselves should be
considered partners in efforts to support healthy and positive develop-
ment. Partnering with adolescents not only strengthens relationships, it also
improves the utility and efficacy of programming. In fact, a growing body of
research speaks to the ways in which partnering with youth can improve
both individual-level10 and organizational-level11 outcomes.
In order to build partnership-oriented relationships with adolescents,
adults must share the power that they are granted within the institutions
in which they work. In schools, this can mean soliciting student input about
the curriculum, pedagogical approaches, and schoolwide policies/practices.
Collecting data about students’ experiences in school, allowing students to
provide formative feedback to their teachers, and creating democratic pro
cesses for schoolwide decisions all support partnerships among adults and
youth. We have seen, for example, a program manager at an urban arts
organization invite young p eople who are program alumni to codesign and
cofacilitate orientations for new teaching artists and students. As program
alumni, these young people possessed valuable insight into what would
make for successful programs, what questions new participants might have,
and what support should be offered to them. In engaging young p eople as
essential partners in shaping future programming, the program manager
acknowledged his own incomplete and partial knowledge, positioned the
young p eople as experts, and offered guidance based on his own professional
experience. Through this process, the alumni gained skills in planning, col-
laboration, and partnership with adults that can be applied to a variety of
settings. In this way, the mutual and reciprocal learning fostered through
adult-youth partnership makes positive transformation possible (Nakkula &
Ravitch, 1998), both for organizations and for the individuals involved.
Praxis-Oriented Relationships
Finally, we believe that strong, positive relationships with adolescents
should be praxis-oriented. Although the notion of praxis overlaps in criti-
cal ways with the notion of partnership-oriented work, we speak about it
separately here to call attention to its significance. Praxis, often talked about
in the context of educational research and practice, is the process of acting
together on one’s environment and critically reflecting on this action, in
order to transform the environment through further action and reflection
(Freire, 1970/2000). Although typically used to describe a pedagogical
approach, praxis can be thought of as an approach to relationships, as well.
When relationships are praxis-oriented, they allow space for individuals to
act and reflect on the world, but also take into account the experiences and
desires of others in efforts to transform reality. In many ways, the call to be
praxis-oriented in relationships with adolescents complements the call to
be partnership-oriented.
In addition to building on the examples we provide in the section above
on partnerships, praxis-oriented work encourages adults to embrace the
idea of adolescents as theorists (Nakkula & Toshalis, 2006) who are actively
making sense of their surroundings, interrogating how t hese settings and
systems work, and imagining alternative possibilities. Adults can cultivate
a practice of regularly asking young people about what is on their mind and
what they are noticing around them—listening closely to how students
describe the conditions of their lives and the questions they might raise.
Adults can also encourage students to use tools such as photography, map-
ping, or writing to document their environments from their point of view,
and to use these observations as a springboard for reflection on broader
issues of concern. Creating opportunities for youth to reflect in groups is
key to praxis, so that individuals can analyze themes and patterns that
might emerge across their experiences and contexts. Adults can then dia-
logue with students about ideas they have for acting on these shared reali-
ties, and facilitate continued dialogue a fter actions occur; it is this ongoing,
collaborative process of reflection and action that can transform realities
(Freire, 1970/2000).
Though it may depend on the wishes of the students and the forms of their
desired change (e.g., planning an open forum for the community, creating a
public art piece, sharing writing, organizing a protest), adults might be called
on to play a role in their students’ actions on the environment. As a group
afforded power and privilege in society, adults must be prepared to disrupt
the status quo, to support adolescents as they create and enact their visions,
and to make room for the self-actualization and liberation of youth. Indeed,
praxis-oriented relationships demand that adults build critical awareness of
their own position within the larger social order, as a function of their expe-
rience, race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and other aspects of their social
identities. This growth in consciousness is aided by building reciprocal rela-
tionships with adolescents that draw on all of the principles discussed in this
section: a strengths-based approach that is founded in cultural humility,
that responds to students’ needs and interests, and that treats and respects
youth as partners working toward shared goals of positive change.
STRUCTURAL PRACTICES THAT NURTURE RELATIONSHIP

BUILDING WITH ADOLESCENTS
Because context both shapes and is s haped by h
uman interactions, posi-
tive relationships require nurturing contexts in which to grow. Building the
types of interactions that we describe above takes time, space, resources, and
support. Contexts that do not prioritize relationship building can inhibit
or undermine the ability of adults and youth to form authentic connec-
tions. To best nurture the building of positive relationships among adults,
among youth, and between adults and youth, we believe that organizations
must adapt a set of structural practices that create physical spaces that
support development and positive interactions, create time and space for
trust building among individuals and groups, are predictable and reliable
in their expectations and supports, incorporate fun, and explicitly address
institutional inequality. Below, we describe t hese setting-level principles
and offer strategies for practices that build them (Table 8.2).
Table 8.2 Structural Practices That Support Positive Relationships with Adolescents
Principles Definition Practices
Nurturing A commitment to settings that feel • Allow for flexibility in seating and work areas.
physical safe, welcoming, and inclusive for all • Involve youth and communities in the design of physical spaces.
spaces individuals; the use of physical space • Engage the diversity of young people’s interests and identities.
to build relationships among youth, • Foster a comfortable atmosphere that feels warm and welcoming.
between adults and youth, and • Foster brave spaces that can support challenging conversations, and where
among adults. there are distinct processes for addressing harm.
• Engage in restorative practices, such as peer mediation, talking circles, or
conferencing.
• Include areas for community conversation and gathering.
Time and A commitment to settings that • Gather with groups through advisory, morning meetings, and/or opening
space to build allow the time and space for circles.
162
trust individuals to get to know each • Facilitate games/team building activities.
other, to build group norms or • Create regular opportunities for reflection.
guidelines for communication and • Build structures for work in groups or pairs.
problem solving, and to effectively • Engage routines and rituals that celebrate all individuals within the
solve conflicts or disruptions that community.
arise. • Aim for consistency and communication across adults.
• Create clear boundaries where necessary; explain the reason for bound
aries that exist (e.g., “I can’t follow you on Twitter because . . .”) rather than
leaving room for assumptions.
• Describe the ethical decisions that you made, and leave room for
discussions of ethics, more generally.
• Advocate for strong partnerships between organizations and parents:
include parents as decision makers in the governance of your organization,
seek their input, and reach out to support them with their own needs.
Fun A commitment to settings that • Provide food or snacks.
make time for laughter and joy, • Participate in games and team-building exercises.
celebration, and cultural practices. • Create opportunities for laughter.
• Integrate music/art/theater.
• Integrate shared interests (e.g. games, art projects) that inspire intrinsic
motivation.
• Plan opportunities to celebrate.
Commitment A commitment to settings that • Include youth voice in organizational leadership.
to explicitly model equitable and just practices • Invite youth to join organizational boards or school improvement teams.
address by reflecting inward, including • Include youth in all decisions that directly influence their everyday
institutional youth voice in organizational activities (e.g., student support team meetings, discipline meetings, IEP
inequality leadership, and joining youth in meetings)
their own struggles/goals. • Question policies that inhibit positive relationships (e.g., rules preventing
students from choosing their teacher), and explore alternative ways of
163
ensuring equity and safety, while also supporting relationship building.
• When policies may be perceived as inequitable, be sure to explain the
thinking behind them.
• Conduct data collection to learn about youth perspectives.
• Partner with youth in actions/activities that are of central importance to
them.
• Advocate for policies that support youth and stand against policies that
may threaten their well-being (e.g., punitive disciplinary policies or laws
that exclude undocumented youth from access to equal opportunities).
Nurturing Physical Spaces

Drawing on insights from the fields of human geography, environmen-
tal psychology, and architecture and planning, we view the physical envi-
ronment of an educational setting as a significant influence on how people
think, feel, and act when they are present in that space. Dickar’s (2008)
research on urban high schools has shown how conditions of material decay
and structures of surveillance (e.g., metal detectors) can communicate neg-
ative messages to students about their self-worth and their potential. Her
work demonstrates how the physical conditions of schools in high-poverty
neighborhoods reflect not just a lack of funding, but the broader structural
inequalities and institutional racism that have historically produced
unequal schools and neighborhoods for young people. In order to cultivate
positive relationships with adolescents, we must attend to the physical
spaces in which we interact, and construct sanctuaries that disrupt the pat-
terns of disinvestment and neglect that exist on the societal level. Although it
is essential for resources to be distributed in more equitable ways across dif
ferent educational settings, it is also possible to design physical spaces that
nurture positive relationships with adolescents in our everyday practice.
Nurturing physical spaces are ones that feel safe, welcoming, and inclu-
sive for all individuals. In the mainstream media and many traditional
school textbooks, young people encounter distortions and erasures of their
varied and complex histories. To c ounter t hese harmful, hegemonic prac-
tices, physical spaces in educational settings can be constructed to reflect
diverse and positive representations of p eople and places that are meaning-
ful to students’ identities. Drawing on the partnership-oriented nature of
their relationships with adolescents, adults can engage adolescents as part-
ners in designing, maintaining, and decorating their environment. Adults
can invite young people to create different spaces within the larger room
that they use: depending on their interests and goals, they can create librar-
ies, art galleries, inspiration walls, miniature gardens, kitchen areas, or
community gathering spaces with beanbags or pillows. Redesigning physi-
cal spaces can become a creative, collaborative activity that joins adults and
youth in shared experiences. Families and local communities can also be
engaged as resources for ideas or for small donations to these spaces, which
can help foster connections between educators and other adults in young
people’s lives. For example, at a teen recreational center located in a vacated
school building, staff, teens, and community members painted and repaired
an abandoned band room to transform it into a fashion show runway, cre-
ated a mural of the local neighborhood in the lobby of the building, and
decorated every room and hallway on a floor to transform it into a haunted
house for Halloween (Vasudevan & Fei, 2015). By centering the desires of
adolescents in the design of their learning spaces—and working resource-
fully to create new possibilities within t hese places—adults set the stage for
relationships that incorporate joy and imagination, and that celebrate the
histories and the visions of those who together inhabit the space.
Adults also can design seating arrangements to facilitate different forms
of interaction within their classrooms (see, for example, Peterson, 2010). For
example, arranging seats so that the teacher sits together with the students
in a circle—rather than having students sit in rows—can communicate a
message that everyone is a valued partner in a discussion, and that t here is
no sole authority or expert in the classroom; rather, every individual has
valuable contributions to make, and each can learn through listening and
dialoguing. On the other hand, arranging seats around a t able of art mate-
rials or camera equipment can signal goals of learning about content that
might be external to the lived experience and knowledge of the students in
the room. Either way, it is a useful practice to use tables and chairs that are
movable, so that adults and young people can create different configura-
tions depending on their interests, their group dynamics, and the goals of
their work. This flexibility of space is an important parallel for the respon-
siveness within the relationship between adults and adolescents, allowing
as many alternatives as a group imagines possible.
Time and Space to Build Trust

As indicated throughout this chapter, building trust is critical to the for-
mation of strong relationships with youth (Pianta & Allen, 2008; Thomp-
son, 2006; Weare & Gray, 2003). Within a classroom setting, trust between
children shapes their interactions with each other (Goddard, 2003; Kahn &
Turiel, 1988) as well as the interactions of adults around them (Dunsmuir,
Frederickson & Lang, 2004; Goddard, 2003). Students who report their
school environment to be supportive and caring are less likely to engage
in violence and substance abuse, more likely to develop positive attitudes
toward self and others, and more likely to engage in school (Schaps, 2005).
Often, this distinction is given to schools where students have strong
relationships with at least one adult, feel psychologically safe, are given
structured opportunities to connect with peers, and feel as though their
needs are met. In addition, evidence suggests that trust among parents and
teachers increases positive outcomes for children (Dunsmuir et al., 2004;
Weare & Gray, 2003) and is an important prerequisite for collaboration
(Voltz, 1994). For these reasons, many of the interpersonal practices that
we name above are intended to support trust building.
Nurturing physical spaces supports the work of trust building, but they
alone are not enough. Educational spaces nurture trust when they allow the
time and space for individuals to get to know each other, to collectively
develop guidelines for communication and problem solving, and to effec-
tively solve conflicts or disruptions that arise. Educators must reserve time
and space for structured activities and routines that build connections
among their students. For example, we have seen educators use morning
meetings during advisory or homeroom to build a practice of greeting each
other, check in on students’ needs, and foster community through games or
team challenges. In classrooms where t here may not be time for a morning
meeting, educators can adopt opening circles where students play games,
talk in pairs, or work to collectively achieve a goal. Educators can set up
structures for group work, games, pair-share activities, and time for per-
sonal reflection, sharing, and celebration of peers. Within and through these
structures, educators can scaffold prosocial behaviors (e.g., group work),
build a sense of collective responsibility for success, provide psychological
safety (often, through consistency), and model language that supports non-
violent communication.
Our experience has shown that it is particularly important for educators
to develop structures and routines around group norms. When norm set-
ting happens democratically and authentically, classroom guidelines help
make classrooms and other educational spaces more predictable and safe for
students within. Organization-wide guidelines also help adults to more effec-
tively communicate with each other, and to remain consistent in the ways
that they address and support students. We want to stress that the pur-
pose of norm setting should not be around enforcement or punishment;
rather, norm setting is useful b ecause it provides predictability around the
expectations that exist in a space, as well as a common language for individu-
als to share their different experiences. To this end, we encourage teachers
to revisit norms as often as possible and to consider ways in which students
can participate in upholding and revising norms when conflict arises; educa-
tors can use advisory, morning meetings, or other routines for this purpose.
This may involve the educators sharing their own expectations regarding
relationships, such as policies about connecting to young p eople via social
media. It is important that part of norming involves educators being explicit
about their sense of professional boundaries so as not to lead to confusion
or disappointment. When t here is conflict, we encourage educators to adopt
an approach that is both formative and restorative. We have found that, for
adolescents in particular, trust is built through the process of healing and
connection. Strategies that uphold norms through punitive or exclusionary
practices typically backfire with adolescents; t here is little evidence that
these policies build strong, safe communities. We advocate for restorative
practices that seek to both teach new skills or approaches to conflict solving
and heal relationships that have been harmed.
Unfortunately, finding the time and space to engage in trust building can
be difficult, particularly within neoliberal educational spaces that prioritize
standardized measurements of success. When schools and community-
based settings adhere to narrow, hierarchical dynamics that conform to
one set of relational norms, many students are left feeling unconnected or
unsupported (Halpern, 2013; Kirshner, 2015). The types of practices that we
describe above are nuanced and complex—they take time to plan and imple-
ment. However, when adults take the time to build trust in educational
settings, students are better able to learn (e.g., Wessler, 2003).
Incorporate Fun
In their important work on effective youth organizing, Delgado and Sta-
ples (2008) write that “youth-led community organizing is serious work, but
it is essential to build fun and learning into the experience.” They go on to
note that “the greater the integration of fun and learning, the higher the
[youth] satisfaction” (p. 82). In fact, incorporating fun into relationships
with youth, particularly t hose that involve moments of struggle or pain, is
important across contexts. W hether organizing a community-based action
campaign, playing trust-building games, completing a group challenge, or
pursuing a shared passion,12 moments of laughter and joy help build rela-
tionships that are positive and celebratory. Fun speaks to basic human needs
for connection, fulfillment, and joy. In turn, experiences of connection,
fulfillment, and joy (including laughter itself, as long as it d
oesn’t come at
the expense of others), can be healing (Ginwright, 2015). Given the increas-
ingly public nature of violence and discrimination in our society, provid-
ing opportunities for fun can offer critical emotional support.
There are numerous ways that adults can bring a sense of fun into their
relationships with adolescents. If resources allow, providing food or snacks
at group gatherings can create a lively atmosphere, while establishing norms
of sharing and caring for one another as human beings. As an example, at
an arts program where sandwich materials are provided when students
meet for longer periods of time, young p eople frequently expressed how
much they enjoyed what they called “family meals”—a time when youth and
their adult mentors could gather around a table, share entertaining stories
and videos, talk about what is happening in their lives, and simply relax and
enjoy each other’s company. Often, these shared experiences over food and
drink become meaningful memories that adolescents associate with an
educational setting, and the caring relationships that are centered t here.
Food and water can also help energize young people for other activities and
interactions, particularly if they missed a meal during the day.
Playful group activities like team-building games are another key prac-
tice for incorporating fun into relationships with adolescents. Games that
encourage movement—like passing a hula hoop across a circle of people,
building a structure out of candy, or trying to get out of a h uman knot—
allow many opportunities for laughter, levity, creativity, and collaboration.13
During transition times in a class session, playing music based on the sug-
gestions of students can also enliven a room, and yield opportunities for
conversation, movement, and community building. In addition, integrating
the arts or performance into group activities—such as taking self-portraits,
writing individual or group poems, or staging a scene based on a life
experience—can also bring the pleasure and fulfillment that comes with
self-expression, and support young people to try t hings that are outside of
their comfort zone. By participating and d oing things that might seem goofy
or unexpected, adults can show their willingness to laugh at themselves and
show aspects of their personalities that people might not see otherw ise.
Adolescents can then see that they can operate in the learning space with-
out fear of negative judgment; they can begin to recognize their relation-
ships with adults as ones where they can bring their whole selves and feel
connected to their joy as much as to their struggles or concerns. In this way,
making space for fun can be liberating for both adults and adolescents.
Explicitly Address Institutional Inequality

One final principle that we find critical in structures that support posi-
tive relationships with adolescents is a commitment to explicitly address-
ing institutional inequality. This principle connects back to the notion of
cultural humility (Tervalon & Murray-Garcia, 1998) discussed earlier,
which demands that individuals and organizations model equitable and just
practices. In short, when schools and community-based organizations
attempt to build strong relationships with adolescents—and, in particular,
when they purport to hold t hese relationships as sacred—the leadership
structures must reflect this commitment. Too often, we pay lip service to
adolescents’ ideas but do not provide adolescents with the agency to part-
ner with us in the work. In much the same way that advocates have recog-
nized the importance for parents and community-based organizations to
be considered equal stakeholders in the work of schooling, so too should
youth be considered stakeholders in all processes that affect their everyday
lives. Organizations working with youth must recognize the adultism inher-
ent in many of our societal processes (e.g., Bell, 1995) and work to address
this by more fully incorporating youth into their leadership structures.
We have seen schools and organizations adopt a number of different
strategies for reflecting inward around questions of institutional inequality.
Some schools work to create structures through which students can help
govern and make decisions about teaching and learning (e.g., student coun-
sels). Community-based organizations are increasingly including youth
on their advisory boards. Including student representation at governance
meetings allows youth to have representation in m atters that affect their
everyday lives; in addition, it often prevents adults from stereotyping or

blaming youth. Organizations can also use restorative justice practices
such as circles and peer mediation to draw youth into community and cul-
ture building. When this type of representation is not yet possible, schools
and organizations can use data collection to build their understanding of
young peoples’ perspectives. Surveys and focus groups can provide adults
with valuable information about the ways in which organizational struc-
tures are supporting (or constraining) positive relationships. One power
ful way of collecting data is to use a youth participatory action research
(YPAR) approach (e.g., Cammarota & Fine, 2008; Mirra, Garcia, & Mor-
rell, 2016) in which adults and youth partner to design a study that investi-
gates a question meaningful and relevant to their own context. YPAR is
uniquely powerf ul in that it helps to level the playing field between adult
and youth stakeholders, while also engaging both adults and youth in the
process of praxis. Through YPAR, adults and youth together reflect critically
on the institutions in which they are embedded, and they make decisions
about how to act to reform these institutions. Regardless of approach, it is
important to set aside time for leadership to reflect on their own practices
and policies, and to receive feedback on how these practices or policies may
be negatively impacting the youth that they seek to serve.
Just as organizations must look inward, so too must they have the cour-
age to look outward and examine other inequitable structures affecting
youth. Schools and community-based organizations must recognize that
the young people in their care often face multiple types of discrimination
and marginalization in society, including but not limited to racism, clas-
sism, sexism, homophobia, gender norms, xenophobia, ableism, and colorism.
By acknowledging the discrimination that exists in society and partnering
with youth to work for positive change, schools and community-based
organizations can demonstrate a deep commitment to their youth con-
stituents. As adult partners, we should seek to support youth in achieving
their many goals, rather than simply the ones that relate most closely to
our program.
CONCLUSION
In this chapter, we have attempted to describe a set of principles and prac-
tices that underlie positive relationships between adults and adolescents
in educational settings including schools and community-based programs.
The ideas that we present build on theories of h uman development, frame-
works of positive psychology, and empirical studies of relationships, as well as
our own experiences in educational spaces. Based on these ideas, we have out-
lined a set of interpersonal practices that help to build positive relationships
between adults and adolescents, and a set of structural practices that sup-
port this type of relationship building.
As noted at the start of this chapter, there is very little research or prac-
tical guidance on positivity as an independent set of mechanisms that can
nourish relationships (Reis & Gable, 2003). Too often, positivity is defined
by the absence or avoidance of negative behavior (Reis & Gable, 2003) rather
than by the models of goodness contained within. In addition, there is a gap
in the positive psychology literature around how to build positive relation-
ships between adults and adolescents in educational settings. Our chapter
seeks to address this gap by providing a concrete set of interpersonal and
structural practices that might be fostered (or measured) in order to build
(or assess) the quality of relationships between adults and youth. These
practices draw from the work of positive psychology, but also add to the lit
erature on positive psychology by focusing on constructive elements of
relationships in schools and community-based programs. By providing a set
of principles on which to build and a set of practices with which to build, it
is our hope that we can contribute to a growing understanding of the posi-
tive psychology of relationships.
We want to conclude by noting that the practice of building positive rela-
tionships is a difficult, imperfect, and time-consuming one. Experiencing
trust and joy in relationships often takes time, particularly for adults and
youth who have been hurt in prior relationships. Although we hold adults
responsible for working toward the interpersonal and structural practices
described above, we also recognize the importance of self-care and com-
munity, as well as the importance of institutional leaders that value and sup-
port the development of positive relationships. Adults cannot only model
how to build relationships, but can also model how to take care of them-
selves within these relationships. This may mean creating a community of
practice with colleagues, spending time with loved ones, receiving support
from a professional mentor, journaling, exercising, dancing, or engaging in
artistic practice—the goal is to make time for activities that regenerate our
energy and ground us in our own communities. Perhaps, most importantly,
we must recognize that we, alone, cannot change the structures affecting
adolescents’ lives. Yet, in partnership with each other, and with youth, we
have the power to build relationships that w ill.
NOTES
1. Retrieved from http://principalwayman.com/biography
2. This may be, in part, b ecause positivity—the absence or avoidance of nega-
tive behavior—is considered baseline. Reis and Gable (2003) note that “existing
research treats happiness and distress in relationships as opposing outcomes on a
bipolar scale, as if happiness was simply the absence of distress. . . .” (p. 131).
3. See, for example, work by Lev Vygotsky, Jean Piaget, Jerome Bruner, and
Albert Bandura.
4. See work by Erik Erikson, Robert Selman, James Marcia, William E. Cross,
Janet Helms, and Beverly Tatum.
5. See work by Freud, Erikson, and Luthar; or Aber and Jones, 1997; Weare and
Grey, 2003.
6. See work by Lawrence Kohlberg, Robert Selman, Carol Gilligan, and Robert
Kegan.
7. Given patterns of structural inequality in the United States, low-income
youth, youth of color, immigrant youth, and LGBTQ and gender nonconforming
youth are particularly likely to experience societal discrimination, although youth
from e very background experience abuse and dysfunction at home.
8. There are other studies that highlight slightly different elements of positive
relationships. For example, in an interview study of 24 mentoring pairs that had
continued over a year through the Big B rothers and Big S
isters Associations, Spen-
cer (2006) identified key features across close relationships as authenticity, empa-
thy, collaboration, and companionship.
9. By way of example, in their article on cultural capital in a transnational con-
text, Coe and Shani (2015) describe the ways in which Ghanaian immigrants to
the United States seek to provide their children with social and institutional
resources from both Ghana and the United States, acknowledging the multiple
contexts in which their children must operate. In line with this, Lawrence-Lightfoot
(1978) once wrote that “home and school more often appear as overlapping worlds
with fuzzy boundaries” (p. 26); numerous studies have revealed the cultural mis-
match of school and home that adolescents must navigate (e.g., Carter, 2005; Gay,
2010).
10. See, for example, Cammarota and Fine, 2008; Kornbluh et al., 2015; and
Mirra, Garcia, and Morrell, 2016.
11. See, for example, Kirshner, O’Donoghue, and McLaughlin, 2002; Mitra,
2008; and Ozer and Wright, 2012.
12. Shared passions can be related to specific activities such as painting, creat-
ing music, or participating in a team sport. Interestingly, Reis and Gable (2003)
write that “intrinsically motivated behavior is experienced as fun; it generates vital-
ity, enthusiasm, and well-being, as well as the enjoyable sensation of ‘flow’ (a state
of absorption in an activity produced by an optimal balance of challenge and per-
ceived personal efficacy)” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 150).
13. See, for example, Moving beyond icebreakers. Retrieved from http://w ww
.movingbeyondicebreakers.org
REFERENCES
Aber, J. L., & Jones, S. M. (1997). Indicators of positive development in early child-
hood: Improving concepts and measures. In R. M. Hauser, B. V. Brown, &
W. R. Prosser (Eds.), Indicators of children’s well-being (pp. 395–408). New
York: Russell Sage.
Baker, J. A. (2006). Contributions of teacher-child relationships to positive school

adjustment during elementary school. Journal of School Psychology, 44,
211–229.
Baldridge, B. (2014). Relocating the deficit: Reimagining black youth in neoliberal
times. American Educational Research Journal, 51(3), 440–472.
Bell, J. (1995, March). Understanding adultism: A major obstacle to developing
positive youth-adult relationships. YouthBuild USA. Retrieved from http://
actioncivics.scoe.net/pdf/Understanding _ Adultism.pdf
Benard, B. (1991). Fostering resiliency in kids: Protective factors in the family, school
and community. Portland, OR: Northwest Educational Research Laboratory.
Bolier, L., Haverman, M., Westerhof, G. J., Riper, H., Smit, F., & Bohlmeijer, E.
(2013). Positive psychology interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized
controlled studies. BMC Public Health, 13(119). Retrieved from http://bmc
publichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-13-119
Brion-Meisels, G. (2011). The importance of student voices: A response to Ayers
and Ayers. Berkeley Review of Education, 2(1), 109–123.
Brion-Meisels, G. (2014). The challenge of holistic student support: Investigating
urban adolescents’ constructions of support in the context of school. Har-
vard Educational Review, 84(3), 314–340.
Brion-Meisels, G. (2016). “It starts out with l ittle things”: An exploration of urban
adolescents’ support-seeking strategies in the context of school. Teachers
College Record, 118(1). Retrieved from http://w ww.tcrecord.org.ezp- prod1
.hul.harvard.edu/Content.asp?ContentId=18223
Brion-Meisels, G., & Jones, S. M. (2012). Chapter 4: Learning about relationships.
In S. Roffey (Ed.), Positive relationships: Evidence based practice around the
world (pp. 55–72). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Towards an experimental ecology of human develop-
ment. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513–531.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). In P. Moen, G. H. Elder, Jr., & K. Luscher (Eds.), Exam-
ining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development
(pp. 619–647). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Cammarota, J., & Fine, M. (2008). Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory
action research in motion. New York: Routledge.
Carter, P. (2005). Keepin’ it real: School success beyond black and white. New York:
Chávez, V. (2010). Cultural humility [Video]. Retrieved from https://w ww.youtube
.com/watch?v=S aSHLbS1V4w
Chavez, V., & Soep, E. (2005). Youth radio and the pedagogy of collegiality. Har-
vard Educational Review, 75(4), 409–434.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York:
HarperCollins.
Coe, C., & Shani, S. (2015). Cultural capital and transnational parenting: The case
of Ghanaian migrants in the United States. Harvard Educational Review,
85(4), 562–586.
Colten, M. E., & Gore, S. (Eds.). (1991). Adolescent stress: Causes and consequences.
New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Delgado, M., & Staples, L. (2008). Chapter 4: Guiding principles and analytic frame-
work. In M. Delgado & L. Staples, Youth-led community organizing (pp. 76–94).
DeLissovoy, N. (2010). Rethinking education and emancipation: Being, teaching,
and power. Harvard Educational Review, 80(2), 203–220.
Desmond, M., & Emirbayer, M. (2016). Chapter 7: Education. In M. Desmond &
M. Emirbayer, Race in America. New York: Norton.
Dickar, M. (2008). Corridor cultures: Mapping student resistance at an urban high
school. Qualitative studies in psychology. New York: New York University
Press.
DuBois, D. L., & Silverthorn, N. (2005). Natural mentoring relationships and ado-
lescent health: Evidence from a national study. American Journal of Public
Health, 95(3), 518–524.
Dunsmuir, S., Frederickson, N., & Lang, J. (2004). Building home-school trust. Edu-
cational and Child Psychology, 21(4), 109–128.
Freire, P. (1970/2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum Books.
General Psychology, 9(2), 103.
Gallagher, E. (2013). The effects of teacher-student relationships: Social and aca-
demic outcomes for low income middle and high school students. Applied
Psychology OPUS. Retrieved from http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/appsych/opus
/issues/2013/fall/gallagher
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Ginwright, S. (2015). Hope and healing in urban education: How urban activists
and teachers are reclaiming m atters of the heart. New York: Routledge.
Ginwright, S. A. (2010). Black youth rising: Activism and radical healing in urban
America. Chicago: Teachers College Press.
Goddard, R. D. (2003). Relational networks, social trust, and norms: A social capi-
tal perspective on students’ chances of academic success. Educational Eval-
uation and Policy Analysis, 25(1), 59–74.
Gonzales, R. G., & Chavez, L. R. (2012). “Awakening to a nightmare”: Abjectivity
and illegality in the lives of undocumented 1.5-generation Latino immi-
grants in the United States. Current Anthropology, 53(3), 255–281.
González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2006). Funds of knowledge: Theo-
rizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. New York:
Routledge.
Goodman, E., McEwen, B. S., Dolan, L. M., Schafer-Kalkhoff, T., & Adler, N. E.
(2005). Social disadvantage and adolescent stress. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 37(6), 484–492.
Grossman, J. B., & Rhodes, J. E. (2002). The test of time: Predictors and effects of
duration in youth mentoring relationships. American Journal of Commu-
nity Psychology, 30, 199–219.
Hall, G. S. (1904). Adolescence: Its psychology and its relations to physiology, anthro-
pology, sociology, sex, crime, religion, and education (Vols. I and II). New
York: Appleton.
Halpern, R. (2013). Youth, education, and the role of society: Rethinking learning in
the high school years. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education.
Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory
of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development,
72, 625–638.
Hirsch, B. J. (2005). A place to call home: After-school programs for urban youth.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Kahn, P. H., & Turiel, E. (1988). Children’s conceptions of trust in the context of
social expectations. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 34(4), 403–419.
Kirshner, B. (2015). Youth activism in an era of education inequality. New York:
New York University Press.
Kirshner, B., O’Donoghue, J. L., & McLaughlin, M. (2002). Youth Participation:
Improving Institutions and Communities [Special issue], 96, 1–118.
Kornbluh, M., Ozer, E., Allen, C., & Kirshner, B. (2015). Youth participatory action
research as an approach to sociopolitical development and the new academic
standards: Considerations for educators. The Urban Review, 47, 868–892.
Lawrence-Lightfoot, S. (1978). Worlds apart: Relationships between families and
schools. New York: Basic Books.
Lesko, N. (1996). Past, present, and f uture conceptions of adolescence. Educational
Theory, 46(4), 453–472.
Linley, P., & Proctor, C. (2013). Research, applications, and interventions for children
and adolescents: A positive psychology perspective. Dordrecht, Netherlands:
Springer.
Lopez, S. J., & Louis, M. C. (2009). The principles of strengths-based education.
Journal of College & Character, 10(4).
Luthar, S. S. (2006). Resilience in development: A synthesis of research across
five decades. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psycho-
pathology: Risk, disorder, and adaptation (2nd ed., pp. 739–795). New York:
Wiley.
Mahoney, J. L., Larson, R. W., Eccles, J. S., & Lord, H. (2005). Organized activities
as developmental contexts for children and adolescents. In J. L. Mahoney,
R. W. Larson, & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Organized activities as contexts of devel-
opment (pp. 3–22). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mahoney, J. L., Schweder, A. E., & Stattin, H. (2002). Structured after-school
activities as a moderator of depressed mood for adolescents with detached
relations to their parents. Journal of Community Psychology, 30(1), 69–86.
Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of ado-
lescent psychology. New York: Wiley.
Martin, J., Romas, M., Medford, M., Leffert, N., & Hatcher, S. L. (2006). Adult help-
ing qualities preferred by adolescents. Adolescence, 41(161), 127–140.
Maton, K. I., Schellenbach, C. J., Leadbetter, B. J., & Solarz, A. L. (Eds.). (2004).
Investing in children, youth families and communities: Strengths-based
research and policy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Mirra, N., Garcia, A., & Morrell, E. (2016). Doing youth participatory action
research: Transforming inquiry with researchers, educators and students.
New York: Routledge.
Mirra, N., & Rogers, J. (2016). Institutional participation and social transformation:
Considering the goals and tensions of university-i nitiated YPAR projects
with K–12 youth. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education.
doi:10.1080/09518398.2016.1192697
Mitra, D. (2008). Student voice in school reform: Building youth-adult partnerships
that strengthen schools and empower youth. New York: SUNY Press.
Morris, I. (2013). A place for well-being in the classroom? In C. Proctor & P. A. Lin-
ley (Eds.), Research, applications, and interventions for c hildren and ado-
lescents: A positive psychology perspective (pp. 185–198). Dordrecht,
Netherlands: Springer.
Nakkula, M. J., & Ravitch, S. M. (1998). Matters of interpretation: Reciprocal trans-
formation in therapeutic and developmental relationships with youth. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Nakkula, M. J., & Toshalis, E. (2006). Understanding youth: Adolescent develop-
ment for educators. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Ozer, E., & Wright, D. (2012). Beyond school spirit: The effects of youth-led par-
ticipatory research in two urban high schools. Research on Adolescence,
22(2), 267–283.
Peterson, B. (2010). Getting your classroom together. In T. Burant, L. Christensen,
K. D. Salas, & S. Walters, The New Teacher Book (2nd ed., pp. 139–144). Mil-
waukee: Rethinking Schools.
Pianta, R. C., & Allen, J. P. (2008). Building capacity for positive youth development
in secondary school classrooms: Changing teachers’ interactions with stu-
dents. In H. Yoshikawa & M. Shinn (Eds.), Towards positive youth develop-
ment: Transforming schools and community programs (pp. 21–39). New
York: Oxford University Press.
Rashid, T., Anjum, A., Lennox, C., Quinlan, D., Niemiec, R., Mayerson, D., & Kazemi,
F. (2013). Assessment of character strengths in c hildren and adolescents.
In C. Proctor & P. A. Linley (Eds.), Research, applications, and interven-
tions for children and adolescents: A positive psy chol
ogy perspective
(pp. 81–116). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Reis, H., & Gable, S. (2003). Toward a positive psychology of relationships. In
J. Haidt & C. L. Keyes (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life
well-lived. Chicago: American Psychological Association.
Rhodes, J. E., & DuBois, D. L. (2008). Mentoring relationships and programs for
youth. Association for Psychological Sciences, 17(4), 254–258.
Richman, J. M., Rosenfeld, L. B., & Bowen, G. L. (1998). Social support for adoles-
cents at risk of school failure. Social Work, 43(4), 309–323.
Rimm-Kaufman, S., & Sandilos, L. (2016). Improving students’ relationships with
teachers to provide essential supports for learning. Washington, DC: Amer-
ican Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://w ww.apa.org/edu
cation/k12/relationships.aspx
Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Split, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of
affective teacher-student relationships on student engagement and achieve-
ment: A meta-a nalytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81(4),
493–539.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychol-
ogist, 55(1), 68–78.
Sameroff, A. (2009). The transactional model. In A. Sameroff (Ed.), The transac-
tional model of development: How children and contexts shape each other
(pp. xiv, 3–21). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sameroff, A. (2010). A unified theory of development: A dialectic integration of
nature and nurture. Child Development, 81(1), 6–22.
Sameroff, A. J., & Chandler, M. J. (1975). Reproductive risk and the continuum of
caretaker casualty. In F. D. Horow itz (Ed.), Review of child development
research (Vol. 4). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Scales, P. C., & Leffert, N. (2004). Developmental assets: A synthesis of the scientific
research on adolescent development. Minneapolis: Search Institute.
Schaps, E. (2005). Chapter 3: The role of supportive school environments in
promoting academic success. In Getting results: Developing safe and
healthy kids, update 5 (pp. 37–56). Sacramento: California Department of
Education.
Seligman, M. E., Ernst, R. M., Gillham, J., Reivich, K., & Linkins, M. (2009). Posi-
tive education: Positive psychology and classroom interventions. Oxford
Review of Education, 35(3), 293–311.
Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., Siegel, B. S., Dobbins, M. I., Earls, M. F., McGuinn,
L., . . . & Wood, D. L. (2012). The lifelong effects of early childhood adver-
sity and toxic stress. Pediatrics, 129(1), e232–e246.
Spencer, R. (2006). Understanding the mentoring process between adolescents and
adults. Youth & Society, 37(3), 287–315.
Taylor, S. E. (2011). Chapter 9: Social support: A review. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.),
The Oxford handbook of health psychology (pp. 189–214). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Tervalon, M., & Murray-García, J. (1998). Cultural humility vs cultural compe-
tence: A critical distinction in defining physical training outcomes in mul-
ticultural education. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved,
9(2), 117–125.
Thompson, R. A. (2006). The development of the person: Social understanding,
relationships, self, conscience. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.) & N.
Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional,
and personality development (6th ed., pp. 24–98). New York: Wiley.
Tietjen, A. (1989). The ecology of children’s support networks. In D. Belle (Ed.),
Children’s social networks and social supports (pp. 37–69). New York: Wiley.
Tseng, V., & Seidman, E. (2007). A systems framework for understanding social set-
tings. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 217–228.
Vasudevan, D., & Fei, J. (2015). “This is their house, too”: An afterschool space
designed for and by teenagers. Family Involvement Network of Educators
(FINE) Newsletter, 7(2). Retrieved from http://w ww.hfrp.org/publications
-resources/browse-our-publications/this-is-their-house-too-an-a fterschool
-space-designed-for-and-by-teenagers
Voltz, D. L. (1994). Developing collaborative parent-teacher relationships with cul-
turally diverse parents. Intervention in School and Clinic, 29(5), 288–291.
Waters, L. (2011). A review of positive psychology interventions. The Australian

Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 28(2), 75–90.
Waters, A., & Asbill, L. (2013). Reflections on cultural humility. CYF News (Child,
Youth and Families office newsletter). Retrieved from http://w ww.apa.org
/pi/families/resources/newsletter/2013/08/cultural-humility.aspx
Weare, K., & Gray, G. (2003). What works in developing children’s emotional and
social competence and wellbeing? Southampton, E ngland: DfES.
Wessler, S. L. (2003). It’s hard to learn when y ou’re scared. Educational Leadership,
61(1), 40–43.
White, J. P. (2011). Exploring well-being in schools: A guide to making children’s lives
more fulfilling. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Wills, T. A. (1991). Social support and interpersonal relationships. Review of Per-
Zimmerman, M. A. (2013). Resiliency theory. Health Education and Behavior,
40(4), 381–383.
9
Social Flow: Optimal Experience
with Others at Work and Play
Hannah E. Lucas
INTRODUCTION
A key construct that has been studied in positive psychology is the concept
and experience of flow. Flow is an experience in which people are deeply
engaged in activities they find intrinsically rewarding (Csikszentmihalyi,
1990). A person may become completely absorbed in such an activity, pro-
gressing t oward accomplishment of a goal in a fluid manner. Individuals not
only report experiences of flow for activities that they typically enjoy (such
as playing games), but also for activities that are repetitive or even undesir-
able (such as writing a term paper). Nonetheless, the flow state is reported
to be a highly satisfying experience, and individuals often pursue it delib-
erately. Many report that they become absorbed so deeply in what they are
doing that little can distract them or pull them away, and they are willing
to sacrifice many other things to pursue this flow activity (Csikszentmih-
alyi, 1990). Flow has been associated with many positive outcomes such as
increased productivity, subjective and objective well-being, and positive
affect (Brom et al., 2014; Decloe, Kacsynski, & Havitz, 2009; Riva, Freire, &
Bassi, 2016; Rufi, Wlodarczyk, Páez, & Javaloy, 2016; van den Hout, Davis, &
Walrave, 2016; Walker, 2010). This phenomenon has typically been stud-
ied as an individual experience, focusing on the conditions needed to
179
achieve it, the intrapersonal experience of having it, and the positive out-
comes it produces. However, the experience of flow can also be conceptu-
alized as an interpersonal experience that has the potential to enhance
interactions, productivity, and relationships with other p eople. Variants on
the phenomenon have been referred to as “group flow,” “team flow,” and
“social flow.” Each of t hese will be examined next.
Group flow has been described as shared collaborative experience,
resulting in flow that reflects a “collective state of mind” (Sawyer, 2007,
p. 43). This type of flow has been described as being transmittable from one
person to the next during activities that require creative output or simulta-
neous action. According to Sawyer (2007), the behavior of group mem-
bers during this type of flow often promotes harmony, trust, and empathy.
The resulting flow state is only observable among this group as they act
together. Team flow has been similarly described as an experience in which
all members of a group contribute their own peak abilities to a task or
activity, each experiencing individual flow, which results in a collective
optimal performance (van den Hout et al., 2016). According to van den
Hout and colleagues, the conditions of individual flow are slightly modi-
fied in a team endeavor to result in team flow. Social flow has been used as
a term that more broadly encompasses the sociocultural context that flow
may take place within (Boffi, Riva, Rainisio, & Inghilleri, 2016). This is the
term that will be used primarily in this chapter to discuss the overall phe-
nomenon of flow in social context. Although group flow has been described
as an interdependent experience that manifests in the midst of sufficiently
challenging group experiences, team flow is used to describe individual
experiences of flow that improve each team member’s performance. Social
flow ultimately encompasses both of t hese terms, as they both occur in a
social context.
The concept of social flow has taken flow to the social context wherein
individuals experience flow in social settings and experiences. Exploring
flow in social contexts allows researchers to understand how this impor
tant positive psychological concept affects the way that human beings inter-
act with and relate to one another. Such shared optimal experience can be
used to build, enhance, maintain, or even restore relationships. The expe-
rience of flow through creative process or shared accomplishment may
allow p eople with previously weak or nonexistent ties to build relationships.
Even strangers can connect and build empathy when experiencing a chal-
lenging event upon their first meeting (Cwir, Carr, Walton, & Spencer, 2011).
For example, two or more people who are brought together while trying to
make it through a crisis (such as a natural disaster) may rely on one another
to survive it. This provides a foundation of shared experience and meaning
upon which to build a f uture relationship. Existing relationships can also
be enhanced and maintained through such shared experiences and mutual
Social Flow: Optimal Experience with O
thers at Work and Play 181
reliance upon each other. For example, two parents may have a shared goal
for their child to succeed in school and may work together creatively to
reach that goal. If existing relationships begin to wane or trust is broken,
shared optimal experiences can also help to rebuild the positive emotional
states that are necessary for closeness and intimacy. For example, friends
who may have had an argument working together as a team to win a game
may be reminded of their compatibility when experiencing social flow. The
possibility for social flow to have such a positive influence on healthy rela-
tionships makes it a useful concept to understand, and cultivate for use in
marriage and f amily therapy, and conflict resolution.
Current research on social flow has examined this phenomenon in many
different ways, such as how different types of activities help to produce
social flow (Diaz & Silveira, 2013; Magyaródi & Olah, 2015), and improve
performance in leisure activities (Brom et al., 2014; Decloe et al., 2009; Inal
& Cagiltay, 2007; Kaye, 2016; Magyaródi & Olah, 2015; Walker, 2010) and
work activities (Magyaródi & Olah, 2015; Salanova, Rodríguez-Sánchez,
Schaufeli, & Cifre, 2014). Research has also examined the effect of social
flow on learning (Culbertson, Fullagar, Simmons, & Zhu, 2015; Ryu &
Parsons, 2012), particularly, how social flow can foster learning and how
social flow may be used to develop useful learning strategies in the class-
room. In addition, several research studies and reviews have been dedi-
cated to social flow’s connection to sociocultural experiences (Boffi et al.,
2016), and its links to optimal outcomes including positive affect, social
integration, validation, and synchrony (Culbertson et al., 2015; Páez, Rimé,
Basabe, Wlodarczyk, & Zumeta, 2015; Rufi et al., 2016; Walker, 2010). The
phenomenon of social flow appears to have promising implications and
applications for personal and social development, and perhaps most
importantly, positive relationships. The ability to initiate, facilitate, and
maintain social flow may be a useful ability for the development of last-
ing relationships between romantic partners, friends, and colleagues.
However, it is difficult to understand the unique potential of social flow
when flow has long been understood to be an individual experience. It
is therefore important to more thoroughly examine social flow as a dis-
tinct construct and recognize its unique contributions to the h uman
experience.
OPTIMAL PERFORMANCE AND OPTIMAL EXPERIENCE

According to Csikszentmihalyi (1990), two conditions that may foster
the experience of flow are when one feels an appropriate level of control over
an activity, and finds that the challenge provided by the task and one’s skill
in completing it are at an optimal balance. Further, it is helpful when the
goal of an activity is clear, one receives regular feedback about one’s pro
gress toward the goal, distraction is minimized so one can have high lev-
els of concentration, and one does not feel self-conscious. In such an
experience, one is so absorbed in the activity that time feels distorted (e.g.,
time feels like it “flew”). The experience also becomes autotelic (i.e., one feels
intrinsically motivated to do it). Social flow has been understood to be sim-
ilar, if not identical, to individual experiences of flow with respect to these
components. All of these elements are considered fundamental to flow and
reflected in commonly used measurements of flow (Moneta, 2017; Payne,
Jackson, Noh & Stine-Morrow, 2011; Zumbach, Seitz, & Bluemke, 2015).
A key argument within the scholarship on flow, which has important
implications for the construction of social flow, is that of positive emo-
tions. Although the original concept of flow does not deem necessary or
include positive affect as a component of flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990),
those who approach flow from the perspective of enhancing optimal expe-
rience often are interested in whether the individual’s experience of flow
is accompanied by positive emotion. Others view positive affect as an
outcome of flow and find that it carries psychological and therapeutic
benefits (Brom et al., 2014; Decloe, Kacsynski, & Havitz, 2009; Riva et al.,
2016; Rufi et al., 2016; Walker, 2010). As such, some studies examine posi-
tive affect as a component of social flow, and o thers view it as an outcome
(Walker, 2010). Although many do report feeling positive emotion during
flow experiences, in alignment with the dominant view, this chapter rec-
ognizes positive emotion as an outcome of the flow, rather than a covari-
ate or component. This is particularly pertinent when describing social
flow, because a robust body of literature describes social variables such as
synchrony, high-quality connection, and social support as being highly
correlated with positive affect, subjective well-being, and happiness
(Aarrestad, Brondbo, & Carlsen, 2015; Carmeli, Brueller, & Dutton, 2009;
Leroy, Shipp, Blount, & Licht, 2015; Rufi et al., 2016; Stephens, Heaphy, &
Dutton, 2012). This implies that due to the positive emotions that naturally
arise from interactions, social flow may be experienced as even more pleas
urable than individually experienced flow. It is important to note, how-
ever, that this may not necessarily mean that optimal performance would
also be enhanced. The stimulation that interpersonal interactions pro-
vide could also potentially hinder some of the necessary antecedents of
flow (such as concentration and lack of self-consciousness), and therefore,
performance.
Therefore, in my current research, my colleagues and I set out to test the
hypothesis that flow is enhanced by social context, examining the effect of
the presence of o thers on each dimension of flow, and flow in general (Lucas,
Csikszentmihalyi, & Nakamura, 2017; Warren & Lucas, 2017). Th ese studies
found that although overall positive affect was indeed enhanced by social con-
text, overall state flow was diminished by social context. The main drivers
of this diminishing effect w

ere higher reported levels of self-consciousness
and lower levels of perceived control when engaging with others.
FLOW IN APPLIED SETTINGS

Flow in the Workplace
According to Magyaródi and Olah (2015), one of the most common con-
texts for social flow is the workplace. Workplace flow has been identified as
a desired outcome that can be fostered to increase employee performance.
A study by Aubé, Brunelle, and Rousseau (2014) found that flow was posi-
tively linked to team performance, and the link was moderated by exchange
of information among workers, and mediated by goal commitment. Social
flow has not only been identified as a way to boost optimal performance,
but also optimal experience.
The concept of team flow within the context of the workplace explores
how individual experiences of flow become collective and contribute posi-
tively to a work environment (Gully, Incalcaterra, Joshi, & Matthew, 2002;
Kozlowski & Klein, 2000; van den Hout et al., 2016). According to van den
Hout, Davis, and Walrave (2016), several conditions must precede a team
flow experience: the presence of a shared common goal, aligned personal
goals, high skill integration, open communication, psychological safety,
and a mutual commitment to the task at hand. These conditions mirror
several of the conditions of flow outlined by Cziksentmihalyi (1990), includ-
ing clear goals, skill-challenge balance, and lack of self-consciousness. Van
den Hout and colleagues (2016) also outline several components that occur
during the team flow experience, that is, development of a shared identity,
a sense of unity, trust, a sense of joint progress, and a holistic focus. Such
experiences predict better performance, satisfaction, development, and
positive energy (van den Hout et al., 2016). Team members are also more
likely to experience group level flow if they have a collective sense of effi-
cacy that may be required for the activity at hand (Salanova, Rodríguez-
Sánchez, Schaufeli, & Cifre, 2014). This type of efficacy can be fostered
among employees when supervisors assign teams with appropriate match-
ing of individual skill levels to the challenges they will face.
Flow and Leisure

Although activities such as working and playing sports are commonly
described as social flow activities (Magyaródi & Olah, 2015), a few studies
have also explored social flow in situations where achievement is not the
ultimate goal (Schiepe-Tiska & Engeser, 2012). These studies have found
that elements such as cooperation, affiliation, and friendship have helped
to foster flow, especially among women (Craig, Koestner, & Zuroff, 1994;
Csikszentmihalyi, 1975; Pang & Schultheiss, 2005; Wong & Csikszentmih-
alyi, 1991).
Studies that have ventured to measure the experience of social flow thus
far have often identified important relational components that serve as
antecedents to optimal experience in social context. In a study by Keeler
et al. (2015) on neurobiological effects of singing as a group, social affilia-
tion with other singers was measured using the stress hormone oxytocin,
along with the arousal hormone adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH).
Participants w ere exposed to two different conditions, one required group
members to sing with precomposed music, and another with improvised
music. Despite the difference in challenge level between the two conditions,
singers reported experiencing flow in both conditions. Furthermore, levels
of the arousal hormone ACTH were reduced in both conditions, and oxy-
tocin levels rose only slightly during improvised singing (which is typically
somewhat challenging and cognitively arousing). The results of this study
indicated that the level of social trust and feelings of connection that sing-
ers experienced was related to the social flow experience (Keeler et al., 2015).
It is worth noting that musical participation has been demonstrated to be
a strongly indicated activity for inducing flow more than other types of
social activities (Diaz & Silveira, 2013).
Games are another interactive activity that are conducive to social flow,
and many types of games have been used as social flow treatments across
several studies. When digital gaming was explored as a social flow activity
by Kaye (2016), digital gamers reported high levels of effective communi-
cation and teamwork. Gamers also reported flow postgame during online
and offline gaming (Kaye & Bryce, 2014). Similarly, c hildren report experi-
encing flow in interactive games, and boys report more instances of flow
than girls (Inal & Cagiltay, 2007). Participants have reported higher posi-
tive affect in the interactive games (e.g., paddleball) than in solitary flow
experiences (Walker, 2010). Similarly, football and rugby players in South
Africa have reported experiencing flow during their games when they had
strong teammate relationships and self-efficacy (Stander, Rothmann, &
Botha, 2015).
Activities such as playing games and musical collaboration, both preor
ganized and improvised, tend to present an appropriate level of challenge
to skilled players/artists, and this provides an opportunity for them to expe-
rience flow states.
Quality of Relationships as a Condition for Social Flow

The common thread among the studies that reported higher social
flow is the presence of factors that enable high-quality social interac-
tions. Individuals’ experience of interactions with others fall on a wide
spectrum—some may be considered positive, while others may be stress-

ful or not engaging, all with varying levels of intensity. The quality of social
interactions and consequently, social flow may be influenced by a variety
of factors: the unpredictability introduced by the presence of additional
people, the social evaluations they may make, and the added difficulty posed
by the need to collaborate with o thers who may not match on certain abili-
ties (Baron, 1986; Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Jackson & Eklund, 2002; Payne
et al., 2011). The quality of social interaction can also be affected by whether
the participants find it to be important or relevant based on context. For
example, a brief chat with a friend may not seem as consequential as a con-
versation during a job interview. In addition, interactions that are too brief
may not allow enough time for flow conditions to occur, while interactions
that are too lengthy may interfere with the conditions of flow (e.g., staying
focused). However, healthy and/or positive relationships or interactions
under the right circumstances may facilitate certain necessary conditions
for flow.
Research on the boundary conditions of social flow has found that social
contexts alone do not predict flow. In one study, while flow positively pre-
dicted positive affect, social interaction during serious games predicted
lesser flow due to high anxiety from the threat of evaluation (Brom et al.,
2014). In another study, participants experienced more flow in structured
interactive experiences such as ensemble rehearsals than in solitary condi-
tions, for example, individual m usic practice, but participants experienced
more flow in both the above conditions than in unstructured social activi-
ties such as hanging out with friends (Diaz & Silveira, 2013). Similarly, in
another study of flow and situational involvement, individuals reported
more positive feelings and situational involvement from social activity, but
also more anxiety, boredom and apathy in social settings, except when in
structured social activities (e.g., at activity-related clubs and groups) wherein
they reported the highest flow and situational involvement (Decloe, Kac-
synski, & Havitz, 2009). Thus, it appears that structured interactive settings
that do not lead to high stress are among the most conducive environments
for the experience of social flow.
Although high activation social settings such as those described earlier
offer some of the best opportunities for social flow, does this hold in rela-
tively low activation settings? A study of social flow conducted by Rufi, Wlo-
darczyk, Páez, and Javaloy (2016) found that while flow was experienced in
the interactive contexts of a Catholic church serv ice, and secular after-
church fellowship as well as a coactive Zen Buddhist meditation, higher
levels of flow were experienced in the two interactive contexts than in the
coactive setting. Positive emotions w ere also higher in the interactive set-
tings than in the coactive setting. Flow was found in t hese activities despite
them being low in challenge compared to typical other interactive social
flow activities that require significant skill (Rufi et al., 2016). This offers
initial evidence for social flow being experienced even in relatively low acti-
vation settings.
Taken together, the above findings suggest that structured settings for
high-quality interactions whether in high or low activation environments,
offer some opportunities for the experience of social flow. Further, trust
between individuals may also be important in supporting social flow expe-
riences. Th
ese findings point to organizational settings and positive work
relationships as a ripe environment for social flow. Next, we discuss the
characteristics of what such positive, flow-inducing work relationships
might look like.
Social Flow at Work

A particularly conducive context for social flow is what Dutton and
Heaphy (2003) refer to as “high-quality connections” in the workplace.
They describe high-quality connections between individuals as those
that strengthen the relationship with e very passing interaction. High-
quality connections, often occurring organically in various social set-
tings (Aarrestad et al., 2015; Carmeli et al., 2009), are brief interactions
that are experienced as positive and energizing (Aarrestad et al., 2015;
Stephens et al., 2012). High-quality connections are characterized by cer-
tain structural qualities (e.g., constructive emotional expression, resil-
ience, and openness) and emotional experiences (e.g., respect, shared
vulnerability, and vitality) (Stephens et al., 2012). My colleagues and I pro-
pose that individuals in relationships characterized by high-quality inter-
actions (e.g., in high-quality relationships) would be likely to experience
social flow frequently.
Current Research on Social Flow

An initial study set out to investigate the links between high-quality rela-
tionships (those characterized by frequent high-quality connections) and
social flow in a work environment (Warren & Lucas, 2017). This study
examined the correlates between components of high-quality relationships
(Carmeli et al., 2009; Warren & Warren, 2017), flow (Payne et al., 2012), and
subjective happiness. Results showed that high-quality connections with
coworkers were strongly associated with workers’ experiences of social flow.
Both presence of high-quality connections and flow predicted w hether or
not p eople reported being happy when they w ere with their coworkers. Fur-
ther, receiving timely feedback (a facilitator of flow) predicted higher qual-
ity connections and in turn, happiness at work. A gender sensitive analysis
showed that high-quality connection (HQC) fully mediated the relationship
between flow and happiness among women, but only partially mediated this
relationship among men. This effect was mostly driven by the HQC sub-
components: respect and shared vulnerability. Furthermore, resilience
within the relationship (i.e., the ability of the relationship to withstand stress
and tension) and openness (i.e., acceptance of each other and openness to
divergent ideas) emerged as the strongest aspects of high-quality relation-
ships in predicting social flow.
Although further longitudinal research is essential to clarify specific
links between high-quality connections and social flow, these preliminary
results imply that connection and relationship quality among coworkers
may contribute to the ability to experience social flow and experience
happiness together. This may be especially true when coworkers are able
to resolve conflicts well and communicate openly with one another. Fur-
thermore, the results of this study provide us with further evidence of
the importance of strong relationship resilience as a precursor for flow in
social context. It also indicates that individuals are happier with the feed-
back required for flow when their relationship quality is high. Thus, the
relationship quality may serve as an important component for social flow
and predictable positive outcomes. A high-quality relationship requires
a sense of trust between actors in a task or activity. Trust enhances the
likelihood of emotional expression, resilience, openness, respect, and
shared vulnerability, which characterize high-quality connections (Carmeli
et al., 2009). Therefore, I suggest that the quality of the relationship is
an important aspect that deserves further attention as an antecedent to
social flow.
Another recent study on the experience of flow focused on how individ-
ual components of flow were affected by social context. Lucas, Csikszent-
mihalyi, and Nakamura (2017) surveyed young and older adults, asking
them to report on experiences that they had separately experienced both
alone and with other people. Participants reported that they experienced
more enjoyment and positive affect when d oing the activity with other
people, but experienced less overall flow. They reported heightened levels
of self-consciousness and less subjective control when d oing activities with
others, which had a significant effect on their reported (lower) social flow.
Furthermore, familiarity with the person(s) involved in the activity served
as a significant predictor of lowered self-consciousness and overall social
flow among female older adults (Lucas et al., 2017).
The above research offers new directions for future research in this area.
Social flow seems to be a strong predictor of happiness and positive affect
among those who report experiencing it, which may in turn nurture the
quality of the relationship. Social flow may therefore be understood as an
effective ingredient for enhancing all stages of relationships. Social flow may
be useful for developing positive feelings between individuals, building
intimacy, reigniting positive feelings once they have waned, and maintain-
ing satisfying relationships over time.
IMPLICATIONS
Shared experiences and activities have been demonstrated to enhance
the bonds between individuals and help to create shared meaning and
purpose (Gonzaga, Campos, & Bradbury, 2007; Schwartz & Olds, 2000).
Relationships in early stages, w hether romantic, platonic, or professional,
are often fraught with uncertainty, as p eople are unsure whether they can
trust one another (van der Werff & Buckley, 2017). Shared flow experiences
that offer challenge and teamwork may provide p eople with the positive feel-
ings that allow for continued interest in an interpersonal relationship. Once
relationships are u nder way, increasing intimacy provides the closeness
that is needed for continued disclosure, trust, and interdependence (Arditti
& Kauffman, 2003; Gustavson, Røysamb, Borren, Torvik, & Karevold, 2016).
When individuals have been connected for an extended period of time,
interest in one another has the potential to drop due to lack of novelty or
conflict (Gordon & Chen, 2016; Harasymchuk & Fehr, 2010). Social flow
may provide opportunities for the reinvigoration of the shared bond that
initially connected the p eople in a relationship. The deliberate employment
of the antecedents of social flow may serve as a protective measure for
maintaining quality relationships over time.
Social psychological research has long focused on attitudes and behav
iors of individuals situated within the social context. However, social expe-
rience is less understood, even though the quality of experience that p eople
have when they are together often determines w hether they w ill choose to
repeat that experience. Social flow may serve as an important explanatory
variable among attitudes, behaviors, and outcomes for understanding what
makes a relationship a truly positive and satisfying experience. Past research
conducted in the areas of social psychology and social cognition give
us import ant clues about the nature of social flow, and how it may best
be achieved. It is important to integrate the findings from these areas
into our exploration of social flow, to expand our understanding of this
phenomenon.
CONCLUSION
The research on social, group, and team flow is still somewhat scarce, and
the concept is still in need of development through careful investigation.
This chapter shows that assumptions of social context as an automatic
facilitator of flow are not universally confirmed. However, social flow does
seem to have the potential to be even more enjoyable than solitary flow
when the conditions for high-quality social connections exist. It is there-
fore useful to develop further research that measures important elements
such as quality relationship alongside flow in social context to understand
how much it may indeed contribute to social flow experience.
REFERENCES
Aarrestad, M., Brondbo, M. T., & Carlsen, A. (2015). When stakes are high and
guards are low: High-quality connections in knowledge creation. Knowledge
and Process Management, 22(2), 88–98.
Arditti, J. A., & Kauffman, M. (2003). Staying close when apart: Intimacy and mean-
ing in long-distance dating relationships. In Points & counterpoints: Con-
troversial relationship and family issues in the 21st century (an anthology)
(pp. 51–55). Los Angeles: Roxbury.
Aubé, C., Brunelle, E., & Rousseau, V. (2014). Flow experience and team perfor
mance: The role of team goal commitment and information exchange.
Motivation and Emotion, 38(1), 120–130.
Baron, R. S. (1986). Distraction- conflict theory: Pro g ress and prob lems. In
L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 19,
pp. 1–40). New York: Academic Press.
Boffi, M., Riva, E., Rainisio, N., & Inghilleri, P. (2016). Social flow: A situated frame-
work for optimal experience. In L. Harmat, F. Ø. Andersen, F. Ullén,
J. Wright, G. Sadlo, L. Harmat, & G. Sadlo (Eds.), Flow experience: Empiri-
cal research and applications (pp. 214–231). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Brom, C., Buchtová, M., Šisler, V., Děchtěrenko, F., Palme, R., & Glenk, L. M. (2014).
Flow, social interaction anxiety and salivary cortisol responses in serious
games: A quasi-experimental study. Computers & Education, 7, 969–100.
Carmeli A., Brueller D., & Dutton J. E. (2009). Learning behaviours in the work-
place: The role of high-quality interpersonal relationships and psychologi-
cal safety. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 26, 81–98.
Craig, J. A., Koestner, R., & Zuroff, D. C. (1994). Implicit and self-attributed inti-
macy motivation. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11(4),
491–507.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Play and intrinsic rewards. Journal of Humanistic Psy
chology, 15(3).
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York:
Harper & Row.
Culbertson, S. S., Fullagar, C. J., Simmons, M. J., & Zhu, M. (2015). Contagious flow:
Antecedents and consequences of optimal experience in the classroom.
Journal of Management Education, 39(3), 319–349.
Cwir, D., Carr, P. B., Walton, G. M., & Spencer, S. J. (2011). Your heart makes my
heart move: Cues of social connectedness cause shared emotions and phys-
iological states among strangers. Journal of Experimental Social Psychol
ogy, 47(3), 661–664.
Decloe, M. D., Kaczynski, A. T., & Havitz, M. E. (2009). Social participation, flow
and situational involvement in recreational physical activity. Journal of Lei-
sure Research, 41(1), 73–90.
Diaz, F. M., & Silveira, J. (2013). Dimensions of flow in academic and social activi-
ties among summer m usic camp participants. International Journal of
Music Education, 31(3), 310–320.
Dutton, J.E. and Heaphy, E.D. (2003). The power of high-quality connections. In
K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational
scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline (pp. 263–278). San Francisco:
Berrett-Koehler.
Gonzaga, G. C., Campos, B., & Bradbury, T. (2007). Similarity, convergence, and
relationship satisfaction in dating and married couples. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology, 93(1), 34–48.
Gordon, A. M., & Chen, S. (2016). Do you get where I’m coming from? Perceived
understanding buffers against the negative impact of conflict on relationship
satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(2), 239–260.
Gully, S. M., Incalcaterra, K. A., Joshi, A., & Matthew, J. (2002). A meta-analysis of
team efficacy, potency, and performance: Interdependence and level of
analysis as moderators of observed relationships. Journal of Applied Psy
chology, 87(5), 819–832.
Gustavson, K., Røysamb, E., Borren, I., Torvik, F. A., & Karevold, E. (2016). Life sat-
isfaction in close relationships: Findings from a longitudinal study. Journal
of Happiness Studies, 17(3), 1293–1311.
Harasymchuk, C., & Fehr, B. (2010). A script analysis of relational boredom: Causes,
feelings, and coping strategies. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,
29(9), 988–1019.
Inal, Y., & Cagiltay, K. (2007). Flow experiences of c hildren in an interactive social
game environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3),
455–464.
Kaye, L. K. (2016). Exploring flow experiences in cooperative digital gaming con-
texts. Computers in Human Behavior, 55(Part A), 286–291.
Kaye, L. K., & Bryce, J. (2014). Go with the flow: The experience and affective out-
comes of solo versus social gameplay. Journal of Gaming and Virtual Worlds,
6(1), 49–60.
Keeler, J. R., Roth, E. A., Neuser, B. L., Spitsbergen, J. M., Waters, D. M., & Vian-
ney, J. (2015). The neurochemistry and social flow of singing: Bonding and
oxytocin. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and
research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes.
In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research and
methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions
(pp. 3–90). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Leroy, S., Shipp, A. J., Blount, S., & Licht, J. (2015). Synchrony preference: Why some
people go with the flow and some don’t. Personnel Psychology, 68(4), 759–809.
Lucas, H., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Nakamura, J. (2017). Solitary and social flow
across adulthood: Identifying conditions for optimal social experience.
Unpublished manuscript.
Magyaródi, T., & Olah, A. (2015). A cross-sectional survey study about the most
common solitary and social flow activities to extend the concept of opti-
mal experience. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 11(4), 632–650.
Moneta, G. B. (2017). Validation of the short flow in work scale (SFWS). Personal-
ity and Individual Differences, 109, 83–88.
Páez, D., Rimé, B., Basabe, N., Wlodarczyk, A., & Zumeta, L. (2015). Psychosocial
effects of perceived emotional synchrony in collective gatherings. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(5), 711–729.
Pang, J. S., & Schultheiss, O. C. (2005). Assessing implicit motives in US college
students: Effects of picture type and position, gender and ethnicity, and
cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Personality Assessment, 85(3),
280–294.
Payne, B. R., Jackson, J. J., Noh, S. R., & Stine-Morrow, E. A. L. (2011). In the zone: Flow
state and cognition among aging adults. Psychology and Aging, 26, 738–743.
Riva, E., Freire, T., & Bassi, M. (2016). The flow experience in clinical settings:
Applications in psychotherapy and m ental health rehabilitation. In L. Har-
mat, F. Ø. Andersen, F. Ullén, J. Wright, G. Sadlo, L. Harmat, & G. Sadlo
(Eds.), Flow experience: Empirical research and applications (pp. 309–326).
Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Rufi, S., Wlodarczyk, A., Páez, D., & Javaloy, F. (2016). Flow and emotional experi-
ence in spirituality: Differences in interactive and coactive collective ritu-
als. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 56(4), 373–393.
Ryu, H., & Parsons, D. (2012). Risky business or sharing the load? Social flow in
collaborative mobile learning. Computers & Education, 58(2), 707–720.
Salanova, M., Rodríguez-Sánchez, A. M., Schaufeli, W. B., & Cifre, E. (2014). Flow-
ing together: A longitudinal study of collective efficacy and collective flow
among workgroups. The Journal of Psy chol
ogy: Interdisciplinary and
Applied, 148(4), 435–455.
Sawyer, R. K. (2007). Group genius: The creative power of collaboration. New York:
Basic Books.
Schiepe-Tiska, A., & Engeser, S. (2012). Flow in non-achievement situations. In
S. Engeser (Ed.). Advances in flow research (pp. 87–107) New York: Springer.
Schwartz, R., & Olds, J. (2000). Marriage in motion: The natural ebb and flow of
lasting relationships [e-book]. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
Stander, F. W., Rothmann, S., & Botha, E. (2015). The role of teammate relation-
ships, communication and self-efficacy in predicting athlete flow experi-
ence. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 25(6), 494–503.
Stephens, J. P., Heaphy, E., & Dutton, J. E. (2012). High quality connections. In K.
Cameron & G. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive orga
nizational scholarship.New York: Oxford University Press.
van den Hout, J. J., Davis, O. C., & Walrave, B. (2016). The application of team
flow theory. In L. Harmat, F. Ø. Andersen, F. Ullén, J. Wright, G. Sadlo,
L. Harmat, & G. Sadlo (Eds.), Flow experience: Empirical research and
applications (pp. 233–247). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
van der Werff, L., & Buckley, F. (2017). Getting to know you: A longitudinal exam-
ination of trust cues and trust development during socialization. Journal of
Management, 43(3), 742–770.
Walker, C. J. (2010). Experiencing flow: Is doing it together better than doing it

alone? The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5(1), 3–11.
Warren, M., & Lucas, H. (2017). Social flow and high quality connections. Unpub-
lished manuscript.
Warren, M. A., & Warren, M. T. (2017). Thinking about “us”? A gender sensitive
examination of relationship thoughts and relationship quality among US
workers. Manuscript u nder review.
Wong, M. M., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Affiliation motivation and daily expe-
rience: Some issues on gender differences. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 60(1), 154.
Zumbach, J., Seitz, C., & Bluemke, M. (2015). Impact of violent video game realism
on the self-concept of aggressiveness assessed with explicit and implicit
measures. Computers in H uman Behavior, 53, 278–288.
10
Measuring the Impact of Quality of
Relationships through the Positive
Emotional Attractor
Richard E. Boyatzis
INTRODUCTION
The applied behavioral sciences have been perplexed about the relationship
between certain individual differences and job performance. More specifi-
cally, why is it that predictive values of various individual characteristics—
whether personality or competencies and skills—fail to account for much
of job performance and related outcome dependent variables, as well as
their parametric approximates. The answer may have been so obvious that
it eluded researchers. It was found in Kurt Lewin’s (1936) classic formula
that behavior is the result of the interaction of a person in a situation (i.e.,
Behavior = Person ×Environment, or the situation). Instead of the structural
or normative cultural environment, the closest aspect of the context for any
individual are their immediate relationships with o thers. In 2006, a fter
40 years of wrestling with and studying organizational climate, reference
groups (i.e., social identity groups), organizational culture, and organiza-
tional structure, I awakened to the likelihood that it was the quality of the
relationships within which we interact daily that are most likely to create our
193
most potent “environment.” Beyond that, instead of searching for overarch-

ing factors in the organizational climate (e.g., rewards and clarity), it was
more likely that the relative degree of certain relational qualities deter-
mined far more than others.
Taking the positive emotional attractor (PEA) and negative emotional
attractor (NEA) concepts from intentional change theory (Boyatzis, 2008)
as the basis for determining the most potent qualities of relationships, a
research program began to assess the degree of shared vision, compassion,
and positive mood in our relationships. This chapter reviews the develop-
ment and findings over the first 10 years of research with the PNEA Survey
developed in 2006 to assess the positive qualities of relationships.
THE PEA AND NEA

In 2006, when this work began, the only concepts in management about
quality of relationships w ere leader-member exchange (LMX) (Graen &
Uhl-Bien, 1995) and high-quality connections (HQCs) (Dutton, 2003). LMX
helped us to understand what is transferred between a person and their
boss, manager, or leader. Although later amplifications of the concept
extended to include exchange of emotions with the LMX, it did not char-
acterize what it felt like to be in such relationships, and whether or not they
were helping. Subsequent research showed that LMX was a key variable in
predicting more effective performance (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). At a sim-
ilar time, HQCs were being developed but no one had attempted to mea
sure them. Since then, people involved in the work claim HQCs focus on
momentary and temporary aspects of the relationships (Heaphy & Dutton,
2008). This left an open question about measuring aspects of the quality of
relationships that helped performance, leadership, engagement, and other
outcomes. In subsequent years, more leadership research has examined the
relationships between the leader and follower in terms of how they affect
each other (Riggio, Chaleff, & Lipman-Blumen, 2008; Tee, Ashkanasy, &
Paulsen, 2013).
The positive and negative emotional attractors (PEA and NEA, respec-
tively) are psychophysiological states that are the tipping points between
stages of sustained, desired change or not (Boyatzis, 2008; Boyatzis, Roch-
ford, & Taylor, 2015). They are the tipping points b ecause the PEA enables
a person to be open to new ideas, p eople around them, and even moral con-
cerns (i.e., what is fair and just). It is the state in which the body, mind, and
spirit can literally rebuild itself (Boyatzis & McKee, 2005). Using complex-
ity theory, they are strange attractors (Boyatzis et. al., 2015; Casti, 1994;
Lorenz, 1963).
Measuring the Impact of Quality of Relationships 195
The PEA and NEA are described by three dimensions: (1) positive ver-
sus negative affect; (2) predominant arousal of the parasympathetic versus
sympathetic nervous systems; and (3) predominant neural activation of the
default mode network versus the task positive network, as shown in Fig-
ure 10.1. Although both states are needed for sustained, desired change
(Boyatzis, 2008), they have different effects on the person’s ability to learn,
change, and adapt. The NEA allows the person to survive and defend against
threats, both real and anticipated (Boyatzis, Smith, & Blaize, 2006). The PEA
allows the person to thrive, grow, and rebuild (Boyatzis et. al., 2006; Boy-
atzis & McKee, 2005).
As discussed in Boyatzis et al. (2015), the PEA and NEA concept extends
the findings of Fredrickson (2004) and her colleagues’ findings on the posi-
tivity ratio (Fredrickson, 2013). They also extend those by Gottman, Mur-
ray, Swanson, Tyson, and Swanson (2002) on healthy marriages and what
they called a positive attractor by consolidating them into a more complete
image of how the person’s body and mind is both engaged and enables
change. Gottman et al. (2002) contended this was a characteristic of mari-
tal dyads.
Figure 10.1 Graphical Representation of the Positive and Negative Emotional

Attractors in Intentional Change Theory
Source: Boyatzis, Rochford, & Taylor (2015).
QUALITY OF PEA VERSUS NEA RELATIONSHIPS

Since a person appears to be affected by interactions with t hose in their
immediate relationships both through emotional contagion (Hatfield,
Cacioppo, & Rapson, 1993; Hazy & Boyatzis, 2015; Boyatzis et al., 2015; Elf-
enbein, 2014) and social mimicry (Boyatzis et al., 2015; Fowler & Christa-
kis, 2008), it is likely that the mood or state of those relationships will affect
the person’s state. In other words, the potent aspects of a person’s relation-
ships might be those aspects that stimulate the PEA or NEA. To move
beyond the positive versus negative affect dimension, while maintaining the
ability to assess neural and hormonal changes, it was decided to focus the
measurement of the impact of PEA or NEA as a quality of relationships
through the basic experience described when being in relationships of each
type.
To generate the measure of the degree of PEA versus NEA being experi-
enced in a relationship, we focused on the actions and experiences that prior
research had shown are linked to activation of the parasympathetic nervous
system and the ability to sustain positive relationships (Boyatzis & McKee,
2005; Boyatzis et al., 2006; Janig & Habler, 1999). The initial conceptual-
ization of the PEA and NEA aspects of relationships that mattered focused
on the degree of shared vision, shared compassion, and shared positive
mood. Each of t hese was considered essential to physiological and psycho-
logical renewal (Boyatzis & McKee, 2005; Boyatzis, Smith, & Blaize, 2006),
and therefore thought to be the more potent qualities in the relationships.
These had been explained as the experience of hope, compassion, and
mindfulness (Boyatzis & McKee, 2005). Several other possible dimensions
were attempted but failed in the early factor analytic studies of the PNEA
Survey. The specifics emerged from field experiments (Howard, 2015;
Passarelli, 2015) and behavioral observation studies of helping relation-
ships (Dyck, 2010).
The PNEA Survey is shown in Figure 10.2. T able 10.1 offers a summary
of cited studies in which the PNEA Survey or one or more of its compo-
nent scales w ere used and reports the psychometric rigor of the scales in
terms of CFA model fit and convergent and discriminant validity. In most
of t hese studies, all of the items in each scale shown in Figure 10.2 were
used. In some studies, the authors dropped the NEA scored items to reduce
the length of the survey. Occasionally, some of the researchers dropped an
item or two from a scale if it did not load on an appropriate factor in their
data set.
In t hese studies, the correlations among the three subscales suggests that
they are associated but the nature of the relationship varies according to
each sample. For example, shared vision and shared compassion showed a
positive correlation in Quinn (2015, r = .642) and Straub (2015, r = .627) but
Describe what it is like to work in your team or organization by answering the

following questions. Circle the number to the right of each question that best
describes the current atmosphere in your work group or organization. Choose
the level (i.e., work group or organization) that affects your day-to-day work the
most. Please assume you are evaluating the local, not state level of organization.
Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly

Disagree Disagree Neither Agree Agree
1. Management emphasizes a 1 2 3 4 5
vision for the f uture.
2. We often discuss 1 2 3 4 5
possibilities for the f uture.
3. Our f uture as an 1 2 3 4 5
organization w ill be better
than our past.
4. This is a g reat place to 1 2 3 4 5
work.
5. I do not feel trusted by my 1 2 3 4 5
colleagues.
6. I feel inspired by our vision 1 2 3 4 5
and mission.
7. We are encouraged by 1 2 3 4 5
management to use and
build on our strengths.
8. I feel trusted by my 1 2 3 4 5
colleagues.
9. I care about my colleagues 1 2 3 4 5
at work.
10. Our work is focused on our 1 2 3 4 5
vision or mission.
11. I enjoy working h
ere. 1 2 3 4 5
12. I do not like working h
ere. 1 2 3 4 5
13. Working here is a joy. 1 2 3 4 5
14. If I had a choice, I would 1 2 3 4 5
work somewhere else.
15. I do not trust my 1 2 3 4 5
colleagues.
16. Overall, it feels good to 1 2 3 4 5
work here.
Figure 10.2 The PNEA Survey and How to Score It

Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly

Disagree Disagree Neither Agree Agree
17. I do not care about my 1 2 3 4 5
colleagues at work.
18. Our purpose as an 1 2 3 4 5
organization is clear from
our vision or mission.
19. Management emphasizes 1 2 3 4 5
our current strengths.
20. I trust my colleagues. 1 2 3 4 5
Instructions for Scoring the PNEA Survey

There are three subscales, which reflect clean factors and the overall total score.
Shared Vision = [Sum Questions Q1 + Q2 + Q3 + Q6 + Q7 + Q10 + Q18 + Q19]/8 . . . the
sum of these questions divided by 8
Shared Compassion = [Sum of Q8 + Q9 + Q20 − Q5 − Q15 − Q17]/6
Shared Overall Positive Mood = [Sum of Q4 + Q11 + Q13 + Q16 − Q12 − Q14]/6
PEANEA Composite Score = [Shared Vision + Shared Compassion + Shared OPM]/3
Figure 10.2 (continued )
Source: © Richard E. Boyatzis, 2008. Developed in conjunction with Will Oliver.
a lower correlation in Babu (2016, r = .463) and a negative correlation in Kha-

waja (2011, r = −.467). Similarly, shared compassion and shared positive
mood showed a sizable positive correlation in Mahon, Taylor, and Boyatzis
(2014, r = .61) but a negative correlation in Khawaja (2011, r = −.549). Shared
vision and shared positive mood showed a slight positive correlation in Pit-
tenger (2015, r = .13) and a stronger correlation in Khawaja (2011, r = .479).
The analyses reviewed from the various studies are reporting only t hose sta-
tistically significant results with multivariate analysis of SEM or HLM. So
when several scales were used separately in the study, the intercorrelation
is accounted for in the statistical routines used.
THE IMPACT OF SHARED VISION IN RELATIONSHIPS

The degree of shared vision is emerging as one of the most formative and
potent aspects of relationships in predicting leadership, engagement, and
citizenship, as well as other outcome variables (Boyatzis et. al., 2015), as
summarized in Table 10.2. By creating a shared sense of purpose or vision
in the relationship, the people are quite literally moving in sync with each
other t oward the same ends, in terms of purpose rather than merely goals.
By having a common vision or purpose, people can exercise independent
Table 10.1 Summary of Studies Showing Psychometric Properties of PNEA

Survey and Its Scales: Shared Vision, Shared Compassion,
Shared Positive Mood, and Composite
All studies listed showed CFA model fit, convergent, and discriminant validity
unless otherwise noted for the scales under which column they are listed.
Shared Shared Positive
Shared Vision Compassion Mood Composite
Pittenger, 2015 Pittenger, 2015 Pittenger, 2015 Thornton, 2015
Clayton, 2014 Khawaja, 20111 Khawaja, 20111 Miller, 2014a
Lord, 2015 Babu, 2016 Hartz, 2014 Van Oosten, 20132
Mahon, Taylor, & Neff, 2015 Mahon, Taylor & Martinez, 2016
Boyatzis, 20141 Boyatzis, 20141
Quinn, 2015 Pardasani, 2016
Miller, 2014b Straub, 2015 Neff, 2015
Neff, 2015
Overbeke,
Bilimoria, &
Somers, 2015
Quinn, 2015
Babu, 2016
Babu, 2016
Straub, 2015
Hartz, 2014
1
Showed CFA model fit only; convergent and discriminant validity not tested.
2
CFA, convergent, and discriminant validity for composite measure with five
selected items from shared compassion and shared positive mood only along
with 12 items from the Quality of Coaching Relationships scale.
volition and make choices in their behavior while interpreting the best
course of action within their own context (Kantabutra & Avery, 2010). It
seems to alleviate the potential for trivializing task-oriented behavior just
to reach a shorter term goal. The context for one’s actions is a shared mean-
ing, which may seem fuzzy to some instead of thinking about the specific-
ity of goals (Carton, Murphy, & Clark, 2014; Griffin, Parker, & Mason, 2010;
Waldman, Reina, & Peterson, 2014). In all of the studies reviewed in this
section, shared vision as a part of the quality of relationships as measured
through the shared vision scale in the PNEA Survey. Th ere is not something
exchanged between the people in t hese relationships, but something to which
they both or all share a commitment, at both rational and emotional levels.
Only statistically significant findings are reviewed from these studies.
Table 10.2 Summary of Studies Showing Significant Association in SEM,

Multiple Regressions or HLM with Various Dependent Variables
for Shared Vision, Shared Compassion, Shared Positive Mood,
or the Composite
Shared
Shared Positive
Shared Vision Compassion Mood Composite
Leadership Miller, 2014a, b
Effectiveness Neff, 2015
Engagement Straub, 2015 Straub, 2015 Hartz, Miller,
2014 2014a, b
Babu, 2016 Babu, 2016 Pittenger, Van Oosten,
2015 20131
Miller, 2014a, b Pittenger, Martinez,
2015 2016
Pittenger, 2015
Hartz, 2014
Mahon, Taylor, &
Boyatzis, 2014
Organizational Quinn, 2015
citizenship
Other Clayton, 20142 Khawaja, Khawaja, Thornton,
20113 20115 20154
Outcomes Khawaja, 20115 Van Oosten,
20133,5
Lord, 20156 Martinez,
20167
Overbeke,
Bilimoria, &
Somers, 20158
1
Composite measure with five selected items from shared compassion and shared
positive mood only along with 12 items from the Quality of Coaching
Relationships scale.
2
Predicted championing behavior that predicts success of mergers and
acquisitions.
3
Predicted care provider reported treatment adherence.
4
Predicted five forms of corporate social responsibility.
5
Moderated impact of emotional and social intelligence competencies on
engagement, career satisfaction, and personal vision.
6
Moderated open-mindedness in predicting and enhancing learning capacity.
7
Predicted psychological well-being and sense of well-being and engagement.
8
Mediated effect of sexism and daughter’s efficacy on f ather to d
aughter
succession in f amily businesses.
In family businesses, where you have the confluence of the family as a

system, the business as a system, and the operating managers as a system,
the issue of purpose and direction is fundamental to progress. The desire
to succeed or sustain the family business is more of a tactical goal than a
feature of their purpose. The question about vision is r eally asking “why”
should the family business succeed and sustain itself.
Shared vision was shown to predict leadership effectiveness in next-
generation leaders in f amily businesses (Miller, 2014a). Miller (2014a and b)
showed with 100 next-generation leaders that shared vision, shared compas-
sion, and shared positive mood were all crucial components of the quality
of relationships in determining the family business climate, which in turn
predicted engagement of the leaders (Miller, 2014b). But among the scales,
it was shared vision that was most powerful with an SEM β of .54 with lead-
ership effectiveness and .36 with engagement (Miller, 2014a).
Within the family business field, Neff (2015) showed that among 110
family business executives, shared vision was the highest loading factor in
creating an effective f amily business culture (SEM β = .765), which in turn
predicted financial performance of the firm (SEM β = .665) and financial
performance as compared to competitors (SEM β = .510). Examining a
popular topic in f amily business research, namely succession, Overbeke,
Bilimoria, and Somers (2015) showed that among 50 pairs of f athers and
daughters in family businesses, the d aughters likely succession that degree
of shared vision (SEM β from daughter = .542) and her father (SEM β = .598)
mediated the effect of sexism in the f amily, gender role orientation, and the
daughter’s self-efficacy.
Although not operating with a family context, professional service firms
do function within a realm guided by the social responsibility and ethical
codes of professional conduct. Again, one might assume the vision of such
a firm, w hether it be a consulting company, hospital, university, or law firm,
was to provide an outstanding service. Again, this is more of a goal—and
tactical one at that—rather than a deeper sense of purpose. Why provide
the service?
One form of professional services is financial services, like private equity.
Examining the effect of relationships on 306 private equity partners in
mergers and acquisitions (M&A), Clayton (2014) showed that shared vision
was one of two variables predicting championing behaviors that have been
shown to predict effectiveness of M&A (SEM β = .16) and the strongest pre-
dictor of the other variable, autonomous motivation (SEM β = .19). In the
related world of investment management, Lord (2015) analyzed how open-
mindedness of 168 university endowment officers affected their learning
capacity. She found that shared vision moderates the relationship by
enhancing the effect (SEM, β = .32).
In a study of research professionals, Mahon et al. (2014) showed that in

knowledge workers teams from consulting and manufacturing research
and development, shared vision affected engagement significantly (SEM
β = .25) and moderated the relationship of emotional and social intelli-
gence of team members (as seen by others, not self-assessment) in predict-
ing engagement (SEM β = .31). Among 795 IT managers and professionals,
Pittenger (2015) showed that shared vision mediated the effect of emo-
tional and social intelligence on engagement (SEM, β = .352, .358, .105 on
the three subscales of engagement, respectively). In a comparably designed
study, Quinn (2015) reported that among 677 physician leaders, shared
vision mediated the effect of emotional and social intelligence on orga
nizational citizenship behavior (SEM, β = .149) and further mediated role
endorsement of being a leader through shared vision, the β increased
(SEM, β = .572).
Shared vision is a key element in the quality of the relationships for com-
munity college presidents. Babu (2016) showed that among 218 presidents,
the degree of shared vision they experienced in their management teams
predicted their personal engagement (SEM, β = .14). It was also found to
mediate the impact of emotional and social competencies as seen by sub-
ordinates on the engagement of the presidents. In a study of 414 community
college faculty, Babu (2016) showed that shared vision predicted both emo-
tional (SEM, β = .50) and cognitive engagement (SEM, β = .40).
Khawaja (2011) showed similar results in doctor-patient settings. Doc-
tors who created a shared vision and shared positive mood with their
patients (375 Type II diabetics) w
ere shown to fully or partially mediate all
other features of the doctor-patient relationship. Even the doctors’ percep-
tion of their relationship to patients in t hese terms predicted treatment
adherence (as reported by the patient’s caregiver) (HLM, β = .087).
The potency of a shared sense of purpose extends beyond professional
service firms, all the way into management and leadership in many forms
of businesses. Hartz (2014) showed that, among 79 managers in dyads with
subordinates, shared vision predicted shared positive mood, which in turn
predicted management effectiveness through in- role be
havior (SEM,
β = .208) and engagement (SEM, β = .245). Straub (2015) studied 412 procure-
ment managers in the Department of Defense and found that shared vision
predicted engagement (SEM, β = .389).
Although orga nizational development prac ti
tioners have promoted
developing a shared vision for decades, this growing body of evidence
strongly supports the benefit of a shared vision for leadership and profes-
sional effectiveness and engagement in many forms. But this growing body
of work also shows that shared vision works as a feature of relationships at
work, and can be seen as a major feature of a high-quality relationship.
THE IMPACT OF SHARED COMPASSION

AND POSITIVE MOOD IN RELATIONSHIPS
To a lesser extent and degree than shared vision, shared compassion
appears to be an important feature of high-quality relationships. It is the
mutual caring and trust that provides the emotional glue within dyadic or
team relationships. In the Pittenger (2015) study cited earlier, shared
compassion among IT managers and professionals predicted two of the
engagement scales (SEM, β = .115 with absorption and β = .065 with vigor).
Physician executives showed a strong link between role endorsement as a
leader and shared compassion (SEM, β = .495) and organizational citizen-
ship task behavior (SEM, β = .210). Although shared vision and positive
mood in the relationship with their doctor mediated its effect on treatment
adherence, nonetheless, shared compassion showed a significant effect on
treatment adherence for Type II diabetics (Khawaja, 2011). Although less
potent than shared vision, shared compassion in their relationships did pre-
dict engagement for community college presidents (Babu, 2016, SEM
β = .07). For Defense Department procurement managers, shared compas-
sion in their relationships predicted engagement (SEM, β = .200).
One possibility may be in the scale, not the concept. The PNEA Survey
scale for shared compassion had items relating to trust and caring. Since
trust emerges as such a strong predictor of many studies in management
(Rochford, 2015), the benefits of caring for each other may have been con-
fused. Another possibility is that it is just not as powerf ul as shared vision
in relationships.
Shared positive mood, one of the three components theoretically pre-
dicted to be key to high relationship quality from the PNEA Survey, is the
weakest in terms of separate impact. It showed a positive relationship to in-
role behavior and engagement for middle level managers (Hartz, 2014). For
IT managers and professionals, Pittenger (2015) found that it only predicted
one of the three scales of engagement (SEM, β = .659, dedication). In con-
cert with shared vision, shared positive mood created a mediating effect on
treatment adherence for Type II diabetics (Khawaja, 2011). Among knowl-
edge worker teams, shared positive mood did predict engagement (Mahon
et al., 2014, SEM β = .46).
THE IMPACT OF THE PEA COMPOSITE IN RELATIONSHIPS

Originally, it was thought that the combination of all three scales in the
PNEA Survey would together create an important descriptor of the quality
of relationships. As reviewed in the previous sections of this chapter, even if
the composite did show significant results, when the researchers examined
differential impact of the three component scales, more often than not one
or more of the scales were much more powerful than the others. There
have been several studies where the separate scales w ere not examined
either because of the structure of the measures used or the preference of
the scholar.
For 239 m iddle level managers in Latin American companies, Martinez
(2016) showed that the PNEA composite score predicted psychological well-
being (SEM, β = .41), sense of well-being (SEM, β = .14), and engagement
(SEM, β=.33), but not effectiveness as measured by the Reputational Effec-
tiveness Survey (Tsui & Ashford, 1994). As a meditator of the manager’s per-
sonal ideal self (i.e., personal vision), the PNEA composite did predict
engagement with full mediation and psychological and sense of well-being
with partial mediation.
The PNEA composite was shown to predict all five forms of corporate
social responsibility (CSR) in a sample of 149 managers with βs ranging
from .10 to .20 (Thornton, 2015). Perhaps more importantly, the PNEA com-
posite mediated efficacy and conscientiousness impact on corporate social
responsibility either fully or partially in predicting CSR. Among 222 Indian
manager subordinate dyads in service companies, Pardasani (2016) found
that the PNEA composite predicted resonant leadership (SEM, β, 767) and
resilience (SEM, β = .878). A subset of five items from the shared compas-
sion and shared positive mood scales, in concert with another set of items
from a different instrument, did moderate the impact of emotional and
social intelligence competencies of 85 bank executives on engagement
(SEM, β = .378), c areer satisfaction (SEM, β = .332), and personal vision
(SEM, β = .626) (Van Oosten, 2013).
IMPLICATIONS FOR IMPROVING THE QUALITY

OF RELATIONSHIPS
The development of the PNEA Survey offered the ability to quantitatively
measure the quality of relationships. As a result of the studies reviewed in
this chapter, a major revision to the test was begun in 2014. Consequently,
a new test called the Relational Climate Survey (RCS) was developed and is
in initial stages of empirical testing (Rochford, 2015). The RCS has a shared
vision scale that is quite similar to the PNEA Survey scale. However, it also
has a shared compassion scale that dropped the trust items to focus on car-
ing. The RCS replaced the Shared Positive Mood scale with one measuring
relational energy.
For practical applications, these studies offer guidance as to how to
improve relationships. In a set of psychophysiological studies of coaching
relationships, Jack, Boyatzis, Khawaja, Passarelli, and Leckie (2013) and
Passarelli (2015) showed that when discussing a person’s vision, core val-
ues and gratitude in terms of who helped them in their lives, the affective
and neurological aspects of the person related to openness to new ideas
and others are activated. Mosteo, Batista-Foguet, McKeever, and Serlavos
(2015) showed that it also resulted in people developing their own person
vision more comprehensively and holistically.
A potential downside to developing too much shared vision and positive
mood might be competition neglect (Camerer & Lovallo, 1999). In such
cases, the elation developed might result in ignoring threats in the environ-
ment and jeopardizing one’s team or organization’s performance.
CONCLUSION
By drawing from intentional change theory, this chapter offers a new
approach to conceptualizing and measuring the quality of relationships.
Relationships do seem to be the context that shapes and helps to create
behavior and performance in various forms. The quality of relationships in
terms of shared vision and compassion, and to some extent shared positive
mood, appear to be significant predictors of leadership effectiveness,
engagement, citizenship, and other outcomes from the relationships. This
points to fresh possibilities for the role of positive psychological phenom-
ena in leadership and organizational outcomes. As most of these studies
revealed, the qualities of the relationships mediate or moderate relationship
between various independent variables in predicting the variety of depen-
dent variables. It does appear that specific qualities of relationships have
impact on desired outcomes and that these qualities can be quantitatively
measured.
REFERENCES
Babu, M. (2016, February). Characteristics of effectiveness leadership among com-
munity college presidents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Case West-
ern Reserve University, Cleveland.
Boyatzis, R. E. (2008). Leadership development from a complexity perspective.
Consulting Psychology Journal, 60(4), 298–313.
Boyatzis, R. E., Lingham, A., & Passarelli, A. (2010). Inspiring the development of
emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competencies in managers.
In M. Rothstein & R. Burke (Eds.), Self-management and leadership devel-
opment (pp. 62–90). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2005). Resonant leadership: Renewing yourself and con-
necting with others through mindfulness, hope, and compassion. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.
Boyatzis, R. E., Rochford, K., & Taylor, S. N. (2015, May 21). The role of the positive
emotional attractor as vision and shared vision: Toward effective leadership,
relationships and engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(article 670).
Retrieved from http://d x.doi.org/10.3389/f psyg.2015.0 0670
Boyatzis, R. E., Smith, M., & Blaize, N. (2006). Developing sustainable leaders
through coaching and compassion. Academy of Management Journal on
Learning and Education, 5(1), 8–24.
Boyatzis, R. E., Stubbs, E. C., & Taylor, S. N. (2002). Learning cognitive and emo-
tional intelligence competencies through graduate management education.
Acad emy of Management Journal on Learning and Education, 1(2),
150–162.
Camerer, C., & Lovallo, D. (1999). Overconfidence and excess entry: An experimen-
tal approach. The American Economic Review, 89(1), 306–318.
Carton, A. M., Murphy, C., & Clark, J. R. (2014). A (blurry) vision of the f uture: How
leader rhetoric about ultimate goals influences performance. Academy of
Management Journal, 57(6), 1544–1570.
Casti, J. L. (1994). Complexification: Explaining a paradoxical world through the
science of surprise. New York: Harper Collins.
Clayton, B. (2014). Shared vision and autonomous motivation vs. financial incen-
tives driving success in corporate acquisitions. Frontiers in Psychology, 5
(article 1466). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01466
Dutton, J. E. (2003). Energize your workplace: How to create and sustain high-
quality connections at work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dyck, L. R. (2010). Resonance and dissonance in professional helping relationships at
the dyadic level: Determining the influence of positive and negative emotional
attractors on effective physician-patient communications. Unpublished doc-
toral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.
Elfenbein, H. A. (2014, August 8). The many faces of emotional contagion: An affec-
tive process theory of affective linkage. Organizational Psychology Review.
Online.
Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2008). Dynamic spread of happiness in a large
social network: Longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham
Heart Study. British Medical Journal, 337, a2338.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The
broaden-a nd-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist,
56(3), 218–226.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Phil-
osophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 359(1449), 1367–1378.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2013). Updated thinking on positivity ratios. The American Psy-
chologist, 68(9), 814–822.
Gottman, J. M., Murray, J. D., Swanson, C. C., Tyson, R., & Swanson, K. R. (2002).
The mathematics of marriage: Dynamic non-linear models. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership:
Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over
25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership
Quarterly, 6, 219–247.
Griffin, M. A., Parker, S. K., & Mason, C. M. (2010). Leader vision and the develop-
ment of adaptive and proactive performance: A longitudinal study. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 174–182.
Hartz, D. E. (2014). Within their control: Understanding how managers can influ-
ence workplace positivity and employee engagement. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1993). Emotional contagion: Studies
in emotion and social interaction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hazy, J. K., & Boyatzis, R. E. (2015, June 12). Emotional contagion and proto-
organizing in h uman dynamics. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 (article 806).
Retrieved from http://d x.doi.org/10.3389/f psyg.2015.0 0806.
Heaphy, E. D., & Dutton, J. E. (2008). Positive social interactions and the h uman
body at work: Linking organizations and physiology. Academy of Manage-
ment Review, 33, 137–162.
Howard, A. (2015). Coaching to vision versus coaching to improvement needs: A
preliminary investigation on the differential impacts of fostering positive
and negative emotion during real time executive coaching sessions. Fron-
tiers in Psychology, 6 (article 455). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10. 3389
/f psyg.2015.0 0455
Jack, A. I., Boyatzis, R. E., Khawaja, M. S., Passarelli, A. M., & Leckie, R. L. (2013).
Visioning in the brain: An fMRI study of inspirational coaching and men-
toring. Social Neuroscience, 8(4), 369–384.
Janig, W., & Habler, H.-J. (1999). Organization of the autonomic nervous system:
Structure and function. In O. Appendzeller (Ed.), Handbook of Clinical Neu-
rology: The Autonomic Nervous System: Part I: Normal Function, 74, 1–52.
Kantabutra, S., & Avery, G. C. (2010). The power of vision: Statements that reso-
nate. Journal of Business Strategy, 31(1), 37–45.
Khawaja, M. (2011). The mediating role of positive and negative emotional attrac-
tors between psychosocial correlates of doctor-patient relationship and
treatment of Type II diabetes. Doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland.
Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lord, M. (2015). Group learning capacity: The roles of open-mindedness and shared
vision. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 (article 150). Retrieved from https://doi.org
/10.3389/f psyg.2015.0 0150
Lorenz, E. N. (1963). Deterministic non-periodic flow. Journal of the Atmospheric
Sciences, 20(2), 130–141.
Mahon, E. G., Taylor, S. N., & Boyatzis, R. E. (2014). Antecedents of organizational
engagement: Exploring vision, mood and perceived organizational support
with emotional intelligence as a moderator. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1322.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3389/f psyg.2014.01322
Martinez, H. (2016). Inspired and effective: The role of the ideal self in employee
engagement, well-being and positive organizational behaviors. Unpublished
dissertation proposal, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.
Miller, S. P. (2014a). Next-generation leadership development in f amily businesses:
The critical roles of shared vision and family climate. Frontiers in Psychol
ogy, 5, 1335. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01335
Miller, S. P. (2014b). Developing next generation leadership talent in family busi-

nesses: The family effect. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Case Western
Reserve University, Cleveland.
Mosteo, L., Batista-Foguet, J. M., McKeever, J. D., & Serlavos, R. (2015). Under-
standing cognitive-emotional processing through a coaching process: The
influence of coaching on vision, goal-directed energy, and resilience. The
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1–33. doi:10.1177/0021886315600070
Neff, J. E. (2015). Shared vision promotes f amily firm performance. Frontiers in Psy
chology, 6, 646. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3389/f psyg.2015.0 0646
Overbeke, K., Bilimoria, D. & Somers, T. (2015). Shared vision between f athers and
daughters in family businesses: The determining factor that transforms
daughters into successors. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. Retrieved from https://
doi.org/10. 3389/f psyg.2015.0 0625
Pardasani, R. (2016). Resonant leadership and its individual and organizational
outcomes: A test of mediation by emotional attractor and resilience.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Management Development Insti-
tute, Gurgaon, India.
Passarelli, A. (2015). Vision-based coaching: Optimizing resources for leader devel-
opment. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 412. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.3389/f psyg.2015.0 0412
Passarelli, A. M. (2014). The heart of helping: Psychological and physiological effects
of contrasting coaching interactions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.
Pittenger, L. M. (2015). Emotional and social competencies and perceptions of the
interpersonal environment of an organization as related to the engagement
of IT professionals. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 623. Retrieved from https://
doi.org/10. 3389/f psyg.2015.0 0623
Quinn, J. F. (2015). The effect of vision and compassion upon role f actors in physi-
cian leadership. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 442. Retrieved from https://doi
.org/10.3389/f psyg.2015.0 0442
Riggio, R. E., Chaleff, I., & Lipman-Blumen, J. (2008). The art of followership: How
g reat followers create g reat leaders and organizations. New York: Wiley.
Rochford, K. (2015, April). Relational climate in the work place: Dimensions, mea
surement and validation. Unpublished doctoral qualifying paper, Case
Western Reserve University, Cleveland.
Straub, E. (2015). Cohesion, flexibility and the mediating effects of shared vision and
compassion on engagement in Army acquisition teams. Unpublished doc-
toral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.
Tee, E. Y. J. , Ashkanasy, N. M., & Paulsen, N. (2013). The influence of follower mood
on leader mood and task performance: An affective, follower-centric per-
spective of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 24(4), 496–515. doi:10.1016/j
.leaqua.2013.03.005
Thornton, J. C. (2015). The effect of relationship quality on individual perceptions
of social responsibility in the US. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 781. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.3389/f psyg.2015.0 0781
Tsui, A. S., & Ashford, S. J. (1994). Adaptive self-regulation: A process view of man-
agerial effectiveness. Journal of Management, 20(1), 93–121.
Van Oosten, E. (2013). The impact of emotional intelligence and executive coaching
on leader effectiveness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Case Western
Reserve University, Cleveland.
Waldman, D., Reina, C., & Peterson, S. (2014). A neuroscience perspective of emo-
tions in the formation of shared vision. Paper presented at the annual meet-
ing of the Academy of Management, Philadelphia.
11
Facilitating Meaningful Communication
among Older Adults
Vera Roos
INTRODUCTION
Due to the growing numbers of older adults worldwide (World Health
Organization, 2015) and their accompanying care needs, residential care
facilities (or nursing homes) offer an attractive option for providing 24-hour
health, social, and psychological care for t hose who can afford it. P eople
move to residential care facilities due to health-related crises, for security
reasons, to reduce dependency on f amily support, and lower maintenance
costs (Cheek, Ballantyne, Byers, & Quan, 2006; Roos & Zaaiman, 2017).
However, relocation to residential facilities often disrupts social networks
(Lee, Woo, & Mackenzie, 2002), which are important across the lifespan,
but particularly so in old age (Khan & Antonucci, 1980).
Relationships are key to well-being outcomes—health, psychological
well-being, happiness—and a main contributor to quality of life (Delle Fave,
Brdar, Wissing, & Vella-Brodrick, 2013; Ryff, 1989; Ryff & Keyes, 1995;
Wissing, 2014). Recent studies have shown that older adults who are more
socially engaged with people throughout the lifespan have a lower risk of
cognitive decline (Carlson, 2011; Chang, Wray, & Lin, 2014; Donavan et al.,
2016; Litwin & Stoeckel, 2016). Social contact and meaningful relationships
that satisfy the need for interaction serve to limit loneliness (Brownie &
211
Horstmanshof, 2012; De Jong Gierveld, Van der Pas, & Keating, 2015; Fes-
sman & Lester, 2000). Studies conducted on relationship-focused care in
residential facilities found that t here was significant improvement in older
residents’ health, decreased use of medication, and reduced boredom and
helplessness (Brownie & Horstmanshof, 2012; Rockwell, 2012). In a study
conducted by Bowling (2005), 96 percent of the participants viewed social
relationships as contributing to better quality of life. Older adults in South
African residential care facilities also indicated that relationships are the
most important aspect in their quality of life (Van Biljon & Roos, 2015). In
light of the growing number of older p eople and limited care resources, it
is therefore important to understand what constitutes meaningful relation-
ships and relational well-being.
Confusingly, positive psychology literature about relationships or rela-
tional well-being is presented from different perspectives, and a clear under-
standing of warm and meaningful relations is lacking. An analysis of
recent literature presented studies that approach relationships and rela-
tional well-being from an intrapersonal, interpersonal, group, and broader
systemic perspective as well as in terms of outcomes of relational inter-
actions. For example, the literature refers to relationships in terms of con-
tribution and sharing (Delle Fave, Brdar, Wissing, Vella-Brodrick, 2013);
sense of belonging (Wissing, 2014); links and processes; “conduits of
exchange” (Wissing, 2014, p. 116); interpersonal competence (i.e., to dis-
close feelings, offer support, and to negotiate conflict) (Costa, Ntoumanis, &
Bartholomew, 2015); and constructs representing relationship well-being
(Gaine & La Guardia, 2009). Patterns of relating have been described in
literat ure in terms of attachment styles, typologies of relationships, and
personality types (Asendorpf & Wilpers, 1998; Bowlby, 1973; VanLear,
Koerner, & Allen, 2006).
Positive psychology researchers have also recently acknowledged that
relational well-being is contextually embedded, and as such should be stud-
ied in terms of subjective appraisal of the individuals’ relationships with all
dimensions of human ecology (McCubbin et al., 2013; Wissing, 2014). These
different dimensions w ere captured in the construct indigenous relational
well-being, which, according to McCubbin et al., 2013, is:
characterized as the sense of satisfaction and happiness (well-being) derived
from confidence and perceived competence to overcome adversity, respect
and be in harmony with nature and ancestors through cultural practices, the
management of financial resources, family commitment, access to quality
health care, and involvement in and contributing to one’s community. (p. 362)
But what, in fact, are relationships? What actually transpires between

eople? Why does it contribute to relational well-being? To attempt to
p
answer these questions, an interpersonal or interactional perspective is
Facilitating Meaningful Communication among Older Adults 213
proposed. According to this perspective, relationships are regarded as con-

tinuously created in the flow of the actions and reactions between people that
take place in a particular interpersonal context (Kitching, Roos, & Ferreira,
2012; Roos, 2016a; Vorster, Beukes, & Roos, 2013). Simply, it means “the per-
son acts, the environment reacts, and the person reacts back” (Caspi, Bem, &
Elder, 1989, p. 378). From a systems perspective, focus or punctuation is
therefore required to analyze t hese circular processes of acting and react-
ing (Vorster, 2011; Vorster et al., 2013).
Focusing first on the subjective experience (emotions) or impact, as Vor-
ster (2011) refers to it, it is possible to identify the impact that occurs as a
consequence of the actions and reactions between participating individu-
als. Participating individuals consciously or unconsciously register the
impact of an action in the act of the verbal or nonverbal communication to
which they react in turn (Hill, Watson, Rivers, & Joyce, 2007; Vorster, 2011).
An impact associated with positive emotions has an expanding cumulative
effect that allows further exploration (Fredrickson, 1998; Fredrickson &
Joiner, 2002), while an impact associated with negative emotions has a nar-
rowed thought-action focus to enable individuals to identify unsafe social
environments (Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005).
When the focus is shifted to what is in fact transpiring between p eople,
observable relational qualities or variables (Vorster, 2011) can be isolated
to explain the interactional nature of the relationship between two people
(see Roos, 2016a; Smith-Acuňa, 2011; Vorster et al., 2013; Watzlawick, Bave-
las, & Johnson, 2011). Observable relational qualities can be identified
through interactional pattern analysis (IPA) (Vorster et al., 2013). The IPA
was originally developed as a psychodiagnostic tool in the context of psy-
chotherapy, and is applied by observing interactional styles in an interper-
sonal context in which interviewers adopt a person-or client-centered
approach. From a client-centered perspective, interviewers assume a non-
directive approach and through empathy, unconditional acceptance, and
congruence observe interviewees’ preferred interpersonal styles (Rogers,
1957)—the manner in which the interviewee typically relates to people.
Even though the client-centered approach is open to critique, t hese “core con-
ditions are helpful to extremely helpful with virtually all clients” (Kirschen-
baum & Jourdan, 2005, p. 43) in obtaining information and observing their
interpersonal styles.
IPA describes 16 variables (referred to as relational qualities) of how indi-
viduals typically interact with others (Vorster et al., 2013): (1) context, (2) defi-
nition of relationships, (3) clarity of self-presentation, (4) emotional distance,
(5) empathy, (6) congruence, (7) unconditional acceptance, (8) confirmation,
(9) expression of needs, (10) linear or circular approach to environment,
(11) degree of interpersonal flexibility or rigidity, (12) metacommunication,
(13) adequacy of problem-solving skills, (14) locus of control, (15) potential for
eliciting hostility, rejection or acceptance, and (16) traumatic events (Vorster,

2011; Vorster et al., 2013).
Context refers to the frame, setting, or interpersonal context in which
the interaction takes place (Vorster et al., 2013; Roos, 2016b). Creating con-
text for effective interaction between people means that a boundary is pro-
vided to promote a logical flow of sending and receiving information
(Vorster, 2016). Definition of the relationship draws on Jackson’s (1965)
notion that p eople are continuously involved in a process of defining the
relationship in three ways: complementary, parallel, or symmetrical (Haley,
1963; Roos, 2016a; Vorster et al., 2013). Clarity of self-presentation refers to
being understood by others or to present yourself clearly and the message
not being obscured (Roos, 2016a). Clarity of self-presentation is observable
in terms of, for example, clear pronunciation, articulation, tempo, creating
context, and so on. The communication of people who present themselves
in an unclear manner is observable when they, for example, use incomplete
sentences, speak in an illogical and unsystematic manner, mix contexts,
or leap from one logical level to another (Vorster et al., 2013). Emotional
distance may vary according to the duration and the nature of the rela-
tionship and can be too distant or too close. Empathy, congruence, and
unconditional acceptance are relational qualities that draw on Rogers’s
(1957) person-centered approach that was developed in a therapeutic con-
text and which is regarded as beneficial in communication (Kirschenbaum &
Jourdan, 2005). Empathy may be distinguished in terms of cognitive or
emotional empathy (Roos, 2016a; Roos & Wheeler, 2016). Cognitive empa-
thy refers to how an individual adopts the perspective and acknowledges
the contribution of another. Emotional empathy is linked to emotions and
whether someone is able to communicate understanding and feelings for
the other (Roos & Wheeler, 2016). Congruence is the construct that
describes the confirmation of verbal and nonverbal behavior or the contra-
diction noted between what is verbally communicated and nonverbally
negated (Rogers, 1957). Unconditional acceptance means having an uncon-
ditional positive regard for other p eople. Confirmation is typically a recip-
rocal relational quality when someone conveys to another that they are
special or exceptional. Expression of needs, according to Vorster et al.
(2013), is the ability to express needs effectively and not in an overdemand-
ing or prescriptive manner. A linear approach is observable when people
view the interaction from their own perspective. From this perspective, they
participate in the interaction from their own frame of reference. In contrast,
people who adopt a circular approach also recognize that the manner in
which they relate and interact elicits corresponding emotional and behav-
ioral responses (Vorster et al., 2013). The degree of interpersonal flexibility
indicates how individuals adjust to different contexts or how rigid they are
(Chigeza & Roos, 2012; Roos, 2016a; Vorster et al., 2013). The skill to meta-
communicate means being able to adopt a higher order perspective and to
move to different positions in the relational interactions, for example, from
message-giver to message-receiver, or from a metaperspective (a helicopter
view) to observe the relational interactions as a whole (Vorster et al., 2013).
Adequacy of problem-solving skills indicates the degree of ability to solve
different kinds of problems, and locus of control refers to e ither an internal
or external locus (Roos, 2016a; Vorster et al., 2013). The potential for elicit-
ing rejection or acceptance is a combination of various relational qualities
(e.g., overeagerness to elicit acceptance may have an opposite effect). Trau-
matic events are relevant b ecause effectively functioning p eople may be
severely affected by traumatic events, which could be observable in the rela-
tional qualities (Vorster et al., 2013).
In applying the IPA, Roos and Malan (2012) focused on the subjective
experience of loneliness (negative emotions) to examine more closely what
is transpiring between coresidents in a residential setting. Relational qual-
ities such as taking a controlling or leading position in a complementarily
defined relationship and being rigid elicited rejection from others and were
associated with a lack of confirmation. In the same study, relational quali-
ties that w ere identified with effective interactional styles that contributed
to needs satisfaction w ere empathy, confirmation, effective expression of
needs, and visibility (clear self-representation) in interpersonal contact
(Roos & Malan, 2012). In a study in which older residents in a residential
care facilit y w
ere asked what they perceived as effective relationships (asso-
ciated with positive emotions), relational qualities they mentioned in rela-
tion to staff and carers included an appropriate complementary relational
definition with staff and carers as leaders, flexibility, empathy, congruence,
and receiving confirmation. In relation to coresidents, a parallel-defined
relationship was identified, of giving and receiving empathy, unconditional
acceptance, effective need expression, and giving and receiving confirma-
tion (Roos & Du Toit, 2014).
How people relate and interact makes it possible to navigate the social
environment to address their social goals or satisfy their psychological
needs (Deci & Ryan, 2000) which, if successfully achieved in the present
context, is regarded as relational well-being (Vorster, 2011; Vorster et al.,
2013). Relational well-being, as we have seen from literature, offers numer-
ous benefits.
Relational interactions take place on a continuous basis in a residential
setting in which older adults relate and interact with carers (including staff
members) and coresidents. Carers often wish to obtain accurate informa-
tion from older adults about their specific needs or challenges, and older
adults in turn may want to share or obtain information, an idea, or a
perspective (Vorster, 2016). This study is particularly pertinent because it

could shed more light on subjective impact and the relational qualities of
older adults, which can contribute to relational well-being.
In the following section, the methods applied to obtain data from
cognitive-f unctioning older adults by using client-centered interviews w ill
be discussed. The data obtained from two cases will be used to illustrate
impact and relational qualities. The implications of the relational qualities
will be discussed in terms of effective or ineffective interpersonal styles, and
for relational well-being.
CONTEXTUALIZING THE DISCUSSION

Relationships and relational well-being are important for health, psycho-
logical and relational well-being, and constitute a main source of meaning
in p
eople’s lives. In light of an increasing number of older p
eople and lim-
ited care resources, the benefits of understanding what contributes to rela-
tional well-being are clear. Very little is known, however, about what
constitutes meaningful and warm relationships. Attempts so far have
revealed linear and causal explanations, confirming the suggestion of Gable
and Haidt (2005) that positive psychology must move beyond the descrip-
tive to meet the challenge of complexity, which is the hallmark of psychol
ogy and human relations. In this regard, the interactional approach is useful
in understanding in concrete terms what transpires between people that
constitutes meaningful relations and ultimately, how relational well-being
can be promoted.
This research applied an exploratory and a descriptive approach, with a
qualitative mode of inquiry. The use of qualitative here means that matters
are studied in depth and in detail in an attempt to understand human and
social phenomena from the perspectives of those involved (Babbie & Mou-
ton, 2011).
Procedure and Data Gathering

The research study was undertaken in a residential care setting for older
white people in Gauteng, South Africa. This care setting is typical of many
others that w
ere, before 1994, exclusively reserved for white older p eople
(Roos & Zaaiman, 2017). Consequently, many care facilities, including the
one in which the research was conducted, do not accurately represent the
racial composition of South African society. This private residential village
provides accommodation and 24-hour care to older p eople (Department of
Social Development, 2006) and encourages the active engagement in
activities and interaction with other p eople inside and outside of the facil
it y. It is widely confirmed in the literature that active engagement enhances
the quality of life of older individuals in residential facilities (Bowling, 2005;
Godfrey, Townsend, & Denby, 2004). An active aging environment enables
residents to achieve growth goals such as autonomy, independence, and
interrelatedness in close and general interpersonal contexts (Deci & Ryan,
2000; Roos & Zaaiman, 2017).
A multidisciplinary team provides support and care to the residents. Ser
vices offered include individualized wellness programs, lifestyle enrich-
ment programs such as biokinetics and sensory stimulation, social events,
leisure activities, sports activities, entertainment, and religious, transpor-
tation, health care, medication management, and convenience serv ices,
such as laundry and hairdressing and meals, and physical and m ental frail
care serv ices. The facility encourages independent living and provides
assisted living and frail care based on the residents’ requirements. They
have the option of living in cottages, apartments, or rooms, depending on
their requirements. The facilit y manages five separate residential villages
across five provinces and currently accommodates approximately 1,350 res-
idents and 250 staff members. Residents were recruited by the manage-
ment to participate in the research.
A purposive sample was used to select participants according to criteria
of being cognitively able to participate in the research activities, to com-
municate in either English or Afrikaans, and to be living in a residential
care facilit y for older adults. The participants joined the research study
voluntarily. There were 12 participants (3 men and 9 women) aged between
76 and 95 years and ranging from fully physically functional residents to
occupants from the residential care facilit y’s frail unit. On the appointed
day for data collection, the participants were informed of the research objec-
tives, the voluntary nature of their participation, and the extent of confi-
dentiality, that their identities would remain confidential when the findings
were presented. The risks and benefits of participation were explained,
and written informed consent was obtained from all participants before
data collection commenced. Twelve client-centered interviews were con-
ducted, and the researcher used prompts to further clarify the participants’
experiences.
Data Analysis and Verification

Data analysis was carried out by using an inductive (thematic analysis)
and deductive approach (IPA) (Vorster et al., 2013).
Thematic analysis. Data collected during the interviews were organized
for the purposes of data management, such as arranging audio recordings
and reflective notes into separate categories for manageable retrieval and
use. Thematic analysis involved six phases of thematic analysis, namely
familiarization with data, coding of data, organizing codes into themes,
reviews of the themes, defining the themes, and reporting back (Clarke &
Braun, 2013).
Interactional Pattern Analysis

Directed content analysis was conducted of the themes that emerged
from the first inductive thematic analysis and applied to interactional pat-
tern analysis (IPA) (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). The thematic information that
emerged during analysis was sorted and coded according to the identified
IPA variables. Codes were sorted into various themes and main themes
were identified. Main themes identified during thematic analysis and IPA
were compared and organized into final themes and subthemes as findings
for this study. The identification of these final themes and subthemes are
in accordance with Hsieh and Shannon’s (2005) view of the goal of directed
content analysis as constituting a deductive method of data analysis to sup-
port and extend existing theory and knowledge.
Irwin (2013) states that the research context in which qualitative data
gathering takes place is crucial to the accurate understanding of the mate-
rial. Hence, a detailed description of the research context is provided. Meth-
odological coherence was achieved by ensuring congruence between the
research question, namely to describe relational qualities that emerged from
client-centered interviews, analyzing the data using the IPA, and interpret-
ing the findings from an interactional perspective (Morse, Barret, Mayan,
Olson, & Spiers, 2002). Furthermore, older adults’ interactional styles were
explored, and it was thus appropriate to recruit older people. Although the
aim of qualitative research is not necessarily to generalize findings, knowl-
edge is described that is transferrable to other age groups (Keating, Eales, &
Phillips, 2013; Keating & Phillips, 2008). The findings’ integrity was further
ensured by involving different p eople in their analysis and discussion to
the point of consensus.
EXAMPLES OF IMPACT AND RELATIONAL QUALITIES

Two dialogues will be presented in Tables 11.1 and 11.2 to illustrate sub-
jective impact (positive emotions and confusion) and the relational quali-
ties associated with them. For easy reference, the specific relational quality
will be italicized.
Table 11.1 Example 1: Participant 5, Female, Age 80+

Interpretations from
Verbatim Account of Interview an Interactional Perspective
Interviewer: Tell me about Interviewer positions herself as leading the
important people in your life. conversation—therefore a complementary
relationship—and the participant accepts
the role of follower.
I have four grandchildren. I have Creates context to bring interviewer on to
now got eight great-grandchildren. the same page in terms of important
The baby is still a very new baby. relationships. The description of her great-
The first two w
ere boys, very grandsons provides context for the story that
much boys, hooligans . . . she is sharing with the interviewer.
So I used to make a habit of Creates more visibility (self-presentation) of
phoning at the weekends just to her as a person by sharing a habit and her
make sure they w
ere alright, you motivation for the action.
know.
I phoned this particu lar day and Creates further context by punctuating the
the younger one, who was then discussion on a particular day and during a
about 7, answered the phone. particular incident.
Now they don’t call me granny Presents herself (self-presentation) as a
or anything, they call me *Rosie. person with a nickname and not in terms of
My grandchildren gave me the a position or role.
nickname . . .
Interviewer: of Rosie?
I mean it’s just carried on Creating further context by describing that
through the generations. the nickname has been transferred down the
generations.
I phoned the h ouse, the little boy Context is clearly created. Presents the story
answered. in a logical manner without mixing contexts
I said: “Is that Jason* or Kenny*?” or logical levels. The conversation between
He says: “Rosie, it’s Kenny.” herself and her great-grandson is punctuated
So I said: “Is mommy home?” in terms of who is talking, when, and what is
He says: “No t hey’ve taken Kevin* said. Th
ere is clarity of communication
to go buy some new shoes. (self-presentation) and consequently
I said: “Are you home alone?” meaning is acquired from the unfolding
He says: “No, I’ve got my friend conversation. Demonstrates the skill to
here.” metacommunicate as she describes the
interaction word for word.
I thought oh no (interviewer The clear context that was created from the
laughs), and I said: “What are beginning and throughout elicits an
you doing?” appropriate response from the interviewer.
(continued)
Table 11.1 (continued)
He said: “Oh w e’re just playing The conversation between the interviewee
around.” and her great-grandson illustrates the
So I said: “Do me a favor, sweetie, following:
go and play outside, because if • Definition of relationship shifts (grandson
you break something inside your takes the leading position).
mother w ill do her nut.” • Taking the perspective of other people (her
So he laughed and says: “No w e’ll granddaughter and great-grandson).
play outside, when mom comes • Communicates acceptance (not judgment).
back, we’re allowed to go and • Judging from her great-grandson’s
swim,” and then he said: “How response, he responded to his great-
are you Rosie?” grandmother’s humor; was able to provide
I said: “I’m fine darling.” the information (need) she wanted and
He said: “When are you coming participated further in the conversation by
to see us?” asking about her well-being and when she
I said: “Not this weekend, I’m would be visiting them again.
coming next weekend my lovey, • The conversation takes place on the same
ok bye-bye. Tell mom she n eedn’t logical level.
phone me back, everything is fine.” • Participating members are able to satisfy
He said: “Ok, bye-bye Rosie.” their needs for information.
About five minutes l ater, I got a Punctuates the conversation further in terms
phone call from my grand of creating context for the dialogue that
daughter. She was killing herself follows. Respects logical levels.
laughing. I said: “Joanie* didn’t he
tell you not to phone me, because
I knew everything was fine?”
She says: “No, but while you w ere Exhibits metacommunication skills by
talking to him on the phone, we retelling a conversation between her
got back to the house. So we stood great-grandson and his friend that was
in the entrance hall just to hear shared by her granddaughter. Focuses or
how he was speaking to the older punctuates the conversation;
adults. When he put the phone communication takes place on the same
down, his little friend said to him: logical level.
‘Who’s Rosie?’ He says: ‘Rosie is
my great-granny.’ He says: ‘All
grannies are g reat.’ He [Kevin]
says: ‘Yes I know, but she’s a
great-granny, a real great-granny.’
He says: ‘What you mean?’ He
says: ‘Well . . . she’s actually my
mother’s grandmother.’ He says:
‘Sheesh, she must be bloody old.’ ”
(continued)
Interviewer and participant both The message is clear, derived from the
laughed. responses of the two sets of participants:
older woman and granddaughter, and
between the older woman and the
interviewer.
In the following conversation the impact is confusion.
*Indicates that names were changed to protect identity.
Table 11.2 Example 2: Participant 10, Male, Age 76

Participant 10 listed two activities he
is engaged in, snooker and bridge.
Interviewer: Tell me, these t hings that
you do, would you say that this brings
meaning to your life?
Oh, plenty yes. You know, I retired Context is not created to provide a clear
being the managing director of . . . frame around the discussion. The
(unclear), um . . . a ll connected to message is unclear due to poor
the . . . (unclear) insurance. My head enunciation, volume of speech, or a
office was in . . . (unclear), my subhead combination of the above (self-
office was in E ngland, one in America presentation). The participant jumps
and one in South Africa. randomly between different logical levels
without creating sufficient context, thus
creating an impact of confusion.
Interviewer: Mmm . . . Unspecific response by the interviewer.
So I went around the w hole world. I The participant is in his own frame of
get a lot of satisfaction out of it reference (linear approach). The
(laughing). You got to um . . . do a lot participant is conducting a monologue
for people. P
eople can do nothing and as opposed to interacting with the
you know, they attach themselves to interviewer, which displays low levels
you and this is why I’m not . . . of empathy and unconditional positive
(unclear). People want to speak for regard. The discussion presents a jump
themselves. The thing is that um . . . I between logical levels, again
get a lot of satisfaction out of it. I could contributing to confusion. No clear
not sit here and do nothing every day. context or self-presentation.
(continued)
Interviewer: With whom do you do it? Interviewer attempts to get the
Who are the p eople you play snooker participant back to focus on the
and the bridge with? interview.
When I came h ere, there was . . . The same impact and relational
(unclear), long ago, before Marion* qualities as previous. Reference is
took over. Marion took over and took made to relational interactions that are
this place by storm. I mean, if you try embedded in an active aging
and keep up, you got to keep a diary. environment.
She keeps a diary of what’s happening,
I mean, w e’re g oing to this, we’re g oing
to that, w
e’re d
oing whatever.
Interviewer: Mmm . . . Unspecific response of the interviewer.
Um . . . the um . . . sorry what was the Requests a repetition of the question.
question?
*Indicates that name was changed to protect identity.
DISCUSSION OF SUBJECTIVE IMPACT

AND RELATIONAL QUALITIES
The following relational qualities w ere observed but did not emerge with
clarity and will not be discussed because only a small part of the interview
was selected for illustration purposes: definition of the relationship, emo-
tional distance, confirmation, degree of flexibility/rigidity, problem-solving
skill, locus of control, and traumatic events. Other references may be con-
sulted for a detailed illustration of t hese and other relational qualities (e.g.,
Chigeza & Roos, 2012; Roos & Du Toit, 2014; Roos, 2016a; Roos & Malan,
2012; Vorster et al., 2013).
The following relational qualities will be described in terms of effective
and ineffective interpersonal styles, with implications for relational well-
being: context, clarity of self-presentation, empathy, unconditional positive
regard, expression of needs, linear (own perspective) or circular approach,
metacommunication, and potential for eliciting rejection or acceptance.
Relational Qualities Associated with

Effective Interpersonal Styles
Context has to be considered for effective and reinvigorated communi-
cation (Green, 2012; Jootun & McGhee, 2011). Context gives meaning to
communication and in doing so defines what is appropriate or inappropriate
within that context. In the first example, Participant 5 used various strat-
egies to create context: she provided background information relevant to
the dialogue; took the perspective of the interviewer (ability to metacom-
municate); added additional clarification, having borne in mind that the
interviewer might not know the background (empathy); and used punctua-
tion during the discussion. Punctuation here means (re)focusing the com-
munication from time to time (Vorster, 2016). Participant 5 illustrates that
if context is created, the meaning of communication is clear, judging from
the responses of the receivers of her messages (great-grandson, grand
daughter, and interviewer).
Self-presentation has to do with the experience of the participating other
as “visible and open” (not obscured) (Roos, 2016a). Johnson (2006) describes
self-presentation as one of the key interpersonal skills to increase interper-
sonal effectiveness. He sees it as a process by which we attempt to shape
how others perceive us, whether to let others form an accurate impression
of the self; to correct mistaken impressions or to make a good impression;
and, according to Roos (2016a), important in achieving social goals and
address needs. From the dialogue it was observed that participant 5 elicits
curiosity and joyful social engagement. (See the responses of her great-
grandson, granddaughter, and interviewer.) A clear presentation of herself
was observed through verbal and nonverbal clues (Hill et al., 2007; Vorster
et al., 2013; Roos, 2016a; Watzlawick, Bavelas, & Jackson, 2011): she did not
confuse logical levels or jump from context to context, and her communi-
cation was easy to follow.
The benefits of relational qualities associated with effective interpersonal
styles are clear: people of all ages are able to follow and to participate in the
conversation. The strategies p eople apply to obtain information are more
effective and the possibility of satisfying needs is more likely. It is also more
likely that p eople with effective interpersonal styles w
ill express their needs
appropriately and experience fulfillment of needs from within themselves
and the environment, thereby gaining a sense of confirmation from o thers,
feeling valued by society and experiencing an enhanced quality of life (Hux-
fold, Fiori, & Windsor, 2013; Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013), and consequently
relational well-being.
Relational Qualities Associated with Ineffective

Interpersonal Styles
In the absence of a boundary created around the discussion (context),
meaning is obscured. On the basis of guidelines proposed by Roos (2016a)
to assess self-presentation of participant 10, it was not easy to follow the
messages he communicated; the messages were either totally confusing or
confusing to an extent. In the discussion different topics are introduced
without intermediary pauses, which resulted in a subjective impact of confu-

sion. Participant 10 presented himself in a confusing manner. This was char-
acterized by an illogical flow of conversation, vague messages, and unclear
communicative abilities. He mixed contexts and logical levels and communi-
cated vaguely, without pronouncing his words clearly, which made it impos-
sible to hear what was said. The nonspecific and vague statements elicited
vague responses from the interviewer and caused confusion in the reader.
The example of participant 10 also illustrated how he engaged in the dia-
logue only from his own perspective (from a linear approach), which dem-
onstrates low levels of empathy and a lack of unconditional positive regard
for the interviewer. Empathy and positive regard are associated with opti-
mal interpersonal interactions (Rogers, 1957; Roos, 2016a; Roos & Wheeler,
2016; Vorster et al., 2013).
In this example, an ineffective interpersonal style is illustrated by refer-
ring to the impact of confusion elicited by a combination of relational qual-
ities. In interaction with p eople, these ineffective interpersonal styles could
potentially result in others not being able to comprehend the poorly pre-
sented older adults and so lose interest in them, which ultimately leads to
rejection from o thers. This in turn results in a subjective feeling of isola-
tion, and clearly in an absence of relational well-being.
IMPLICATIONS FOR RELATIONAL WELL-BEING

It is in their actions and reactions that people develop preferred styles of
interaction (Sullivan, 1953) that can be observed in terms of their effective-
ness or ineffectiveness (Vorster et al., 2013). The effectiveness of the pre-
ferred style of interaction has to do with how p eople interact with others
and elicit satisfying responses from them and the environment, which in
turn contribute to their health and psychological and relational well-being.
In contrast, ineffective interpersonal styles are more likely to elicit distance
and ultimately rejection from o thers, and contribute to subjective experi-
ences of loneliness and social isolation (Costa et al., 2015; Roos & Malan,
2012; Vorster, 2011). Ineffective interpersonal styles might be observed, for
example, as the result of traumatic events (Vorster et al., 2013), or when
older adults present with dementia, which affects expressive language abil-
ities and comprehension (De Vries, 2013; James, 2011). Relocating to a new
environment may be perceived by some older adults as traumatic. It should
be emphasized that all participants recruited for this study w ere, accord-
ing to the staff of the residential facilit y, cognitively able to participate in
the research activities.
To be able to use the IPA and propose effective strategies to identify rela-
tional qualities requires a sound background in psychology and therapeu-
tic interventions. However, a few guidelines are offered for health care
professionals who may need to engage with older adults who display ineffec
tive interpersonal styles. First, recognize the impact of your presence in
the interaction. The manner in which health care professionals introduce
themselves to older adults and how they create context has an initial impact
that can be observed in the corresponding reaction of the older adult. It is
important to distinguish between intent and impact (Vorster, 2011). Sec-
ond, in e very relational interaction, the relationship may be defined e ither
as complementary, parallel, or symmetrical. For example, the interviewer
defined the relationship with participant 5 as a complementary, with her
leading and the participant following. Depending on the interpersonal con-
text this may be appropriate, but in another interpersonal context it may
be not. Third, health care professionals should therefore be flexible, be able
to metacommunicate, and demonstrate empathy, congruence, and uncondi-
tional positive regard. Fourth, they should be able to display the appropriate
emotional distance in relation to the respective older adult with whom they
engage. Fifth, when older adults present themselves in an unclear manner,
jumping between contexts and logical levels, health care professions can
obtain feedback from the older adult. By checking back, participating mem-
bers can ensure that they are in agreement, on the same page, and thereby
obtain accurate information (Vorster, 2016). Sixth, health care professionals
may be trained to steer the conversation in a particular direction and to
create a dance with the participating other in which they can join.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH

The interpersonal or interactional approach to the study of relational
interactions has not so far attracted scholars who are able to develop mea
surements to quantify relational qualities in relation to impact. The useful-
ness of the IPA has been demonstrated in various South African contexts and
its applicability further afield would be interesting. Positive psychology can
benefit from the introduction of methods to study the complexity of human
interaction apart from the linear approaches that have been tried and tested.
CONCLUSION
In accordance with self-interactional group theory (SIGT) (Roos, 2016a),
relational interactions are always embedded in broader environments (con-
textually informed) and take place on three interrelated levels: the intrap-
ersonal (subjective impact), interpersonal (relational qualities), and the
group level. In this chapter, the interpersonal context in which relational
qualities were observed was embedded in an active environment. People
register impact, even if they are not aware of it, and react to it with an emo-
tional and behavioral response, which in its turn elicits a response. The
combination of subjective impact and relational qualities can be used to

make deductions about interpersonal styles. These styles may be effective
or ineffective, which w ill determine the quality of the development and
maintenance of meaningful relationships. Effective interpersonal styles
contribute to relational well-being, while ineffective interpersonal styles
may elicit social rejection and a consequent sense of isolation. If positive
psychology w ere to view relationships as dynamic interactions, rather than
as static noncontextual actions, meaning will be derived from the interac-
tion to facilitate effective engagement with the social environment. By
adopting a metaperspective on relational interactions, it becomes possible
to move to different perspectives—intrapersonal, interpersonal, group, and
contextual—without mixing different logical levels or contexts. A positive
psychology of relationships, which appreciates the dichotomous nature of
relational interactions, accommodates the notion that relational interactions
may elicit outcomes ranging on a continuum from effective to ineffective.
A positive social science that adopts a “both-and” approach to relational
interactions allows for the holistic study of complex human behavior.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Special thanks to Ms. E du Plessis for assistance with the literature
review.
REFERENCES
Asendorpf, J. B., & Wilpers, S. (1998). Personality effects on social relationships.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1531–1544.
Babbie, E., & Mouton, J. (2011). The practice of social research. Cape Town, South
Africa: Oxford University Press.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss. New York: Basic Books.
Bowling, A. (2005). Ageing well: Quality of life in old age. Berkshire, E
ngland: Open
University Press.
Brownie, S., & Horstmanshof, L. (2012). Creating conditions for the self-f ulfilment
for aged care residents. Nursing Ethics, 19(6), 777–786. doi:10.1177/096
9733011423292
Carlson, M. C. (2011, June 23). Promoting healthy, meaningful aging through social
involvement: Building an experience corps. Cerebrum, 10. Retrieved from
http://dana.org/news/cerebrum/detail.aspx?id=33556
Caspi, A., Bem, D. J., & Elder, G. H., Jr. (1989). Continuities and consequences of
interactional styles across the life course. Journal of Personality 57(2),
375–406.
Chang, P.-J., Wray, L., & Lin, Y. (2014). Social relationships, leisure activity, and
health in older adults. Health Psychology 33(6), 516–523.
Cheek, J., Ballantye, A., Byers, L., & Quan, J. (2006). From retirement village to resi-
dential aged care: What older p eople and their families say. Health and
Social Care in the Community, 15(1), 8–17. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2524.2006
.00646.x
Chigeza, S., & Roos, V. (2012). An exploration of flexibility/rigidity as relational
quality of African migrants in South Africa as new cultural and social envi-
ronment. South African Journal of Psychology, 42(4), 576–585. Retrieved
from http://sap.sagepub.com/content/42/4/576.abstract
Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for
beginners. London, England: Sage.
Costa, S., Ntoumanis, N., & Bartholomew, K. J. (2015). Predicting the brighter and
darker sides of interpersonal relationships: Does psychological need thwart-
ing matter? Motivation and Emotions, 39, 11–24. doi:10.1007/s11031-014
-9427-0
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human
needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4),
227–268. Retrieved from http://w ww.jstor.org/stable/1449618
De Jong Gierveld, J., Van der Pas, S., & Keating, N. (2015). Loneliness of older immi-
grant groups in Canada: Effects of ethnic-cultural background. Journal
of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 39(3), 251–268. doi:10.1007/s10823-015
-9265-x
Delle Fave, A., Brdar, I., Wissing, M. P., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2013). Sources and
motives for personal meaning in adulthood. The Journal of Positive Psychol
ogy, 8(6), 517–529. doi:10.1080/17439760.2013.830761
Department of Social Development. (2006). Older Persons Act (Act No. 13 of 2006).
Pretoria: Government Printers.www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/2006
-013_olderpersons.pdf
De Vries, K. (2013). Communicating with older adults with dementia. Nursing
Older People, 25(4), 30–37.
Donovan, N. J., Wu, Q., Rentz, D. M., Sperling, R. A., Marshall, G. A., & Glymour,
M. M. (2016). Loneliness, depression and cognitive function in older U.S.
adults. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 9. doi:10.1002/gps.4495
Fessman, N., & Lester, D. (2000). Loneliness and depression among elderly nurs-
ing home patients. International Journal of Aging and H uman Development,
51(2), 137–141.
Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psy
chology, 2, 300–319.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Branigan, C. (2005). Positive emotions broaden the scope of
attention and thought-action repertoires. Cognition and Emotion, 19(3),
313–332. doi:10.1080/02699930441000238
Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals
toward emotional well-being. Psychological Science, 13(2), 172–175.
General Psychology, 9(2), 103–110.
Gaine, G. S., & La Guardia, J. G. (2009). The unique contributions of motivations
to maintain a relationship and motivations toward relational activities to
relationship well-being. Motivation and Emotion, 33, 184–292. doi:10.1007/

s11031-0009-9120-x
Godfrey, M., Townsend, J., & Denby, T. (2004). Building a good life for older adults
in local communities: The experience of ageing in time and place. York,
England: York Publishing Services.
Green, D. (2012). Communication and cognitive impairment. Nursing & Residen-
tial Care, 14(9), 446–449.
Haley, J. (1963). Strategies of psychotherapy. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Hill, A., Watson, J., Rivers, D., & Joyce, M. (2007). Key themes in interpersonal com-
munication. Berkshire, England: Open University Press.
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analy
sis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. doi:10.1177/10497323
05276687
Huxfold, O., Fiori, K. L., & Windsor, T. D. (2013). The dynamic interplay of social
network characteristics, subjective well-being, and health: The costs and
benefits of socio-emotional selectivity. Psychology and Aging, 28(1), 3–16.
doi:10.1037/a0030170
Irwin, S. (2013). Qualitative secondary analysis: Ethics, epistemology and context.
Prog ress in Development Studies, 13(4), 295–306. doi:10.1177/14649934
13490479
Jackson, D. D. (1965). The study of the family. Family Process, 4(1), 1–20.
doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1965.00001.x
James, I. A. (2011). Understanding behavior in dementia that challenges: A guide
to assessment and treatment. London, England: Jessica Kingsley.
Johnson, D. W. (2006). Reaching out: Interpersonal effectiveness and self-
actualization. Boston: Pearson.
Jootun, D., & McGhee, G. (2011). Effective communication with p eople who have
dementia. Nursing Standard, 25(25), 40–46.
Keating, N., Eales, J., & Phillips, J. E. (2013). Age-friendly rural communities: Con-
ceptualizing ‘best-fit.’ Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du
vieillissement, 32(4), 319–332. Retrieved from http://d x.doi.org/10.1017
/S0714980813000408
Keating, N., & Phillips, J. (2008). A critical human ecology perspective on rural age-
ing. In N. Keating (Ed.), Rural ageing: A good place to grow old? (pp. 1–10).
Bristol, England: The Policy Press.
Khan, R. L., & Antonucci, T. C. (1980). Convoys over the life course: Attach-
ment, roles, and social support. Life Span Development and Behaviour, 3,
253–286.
Kirschenbaum, H., & Jourdan, A. (2005). The current status of Carl Rogers and the
person-centered approach. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice,
Training, 42(1), 37–51. doi:10.1037/0033-3204.42.1.37
Kitching, A. E., Roos, V., & Ferreira, R. (2012). T owards an understanding of nur-
turing and restraining relational patterns in school communities. Journal
of Psychology in Africa, 22(2), 187–200.
Lee, D. T. F., Woo, J., & Mackenzie, A. E. (2002). A review of older p eople’s experi-
ences with residential care placement. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 37(1),
19–27.
Litwin, H., & Stoeckel, K. J. (2016). Social network, activity anticipation, and cog-
nition: A complex relationship. Research on Aging, 38(1), 76–97.
McCubbin, L. D., McCubbin, H. I., Kehl, L., & Strom, I. (2013). Relational well-
being: An indigenous perspective and measure. Family Relations, 62,
354–365. doi:10.1111/fare.12007
Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification
strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13–22. Retrieved from
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0
Rockwell, J. (2012). From person-centered to relational care: Expanding the focus
in residential care facilities. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 55(3),
233–248. doi:10.1080/01634372.2011.639438
Rogers, C. R. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic person-
ality change. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 21(2), 95–103. doi:10.1037
10033-3204.44.3.240
Roos, V. (2016a). Theorizing from the Mmogo-method: Self-Interactional Group
Theory (SIGT) to explain relational interactions. In V. Roos (Ed.), Under-
standing relational and group experiences through the Mmogo-method®
(pp. 141–170). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Roos, V. (2016b). Conducting the Mmogo-method. In V. Roos (Ed.), Understand-
ing personal and relational experiences: The Mmogo-method® (pp. 19–32).
Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Roos, V., & Du Toit (2014). Perceptions of effective relationships in an institutional
care setting for older p eople. South African Journal for Industrial Psychol
ogy, 40(1), 1–9. Retrieved from http://w ww.sajip.co.z a/i ndex.php/s ajip
/article/view/1139
Roos, V., & Malan, L. (2012). The role of context and the interpersonal experience
of loneliness among older adults in a residential facilit y. Global Health
Action, 5. Retrieved from http://w ww.globalhealthaction.net/index.php/gha
/article/view/18861/html
Roos, V., & Wheeler, A. (2016). Older p eople’s experiences of giving and receiving
empathy in relation to middle adolescents in rural South Africa. South Afri-
can Journal of Psychology, 1–13. doi:10.1177/0081246316638563 sap.sage-
pub.com
Roos, V., & Zaaiman, R. (2017). Active ageing as positive intervention: Some unin-
tended consequences. In C. Proctor (Ed.), Positive psychology interventions
in practice (pp. 47–64). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning
of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57,
1069–1081.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revis-
ited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727.
Smith-Acuňa, S. (2011). Systems theory in action: Application to individual, c ouple
and f amily therapy. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. London: Tavistock.
Van Biljon, L., & Roos, V., (2015). The nature of quality of life in residential care
facilities: The case of White older South Africans. Journal of Psychology in
Africa, 25(3), 201–207. Retrieved from http://d x.doi.org/10.1080/14330237

.2015.1065054
VanLear, C. A., Koerner, A., & Allen, D. M. (2006). Relationship typologies. In
A. L. Vangelisti & D. Perlman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal
relationships (pp. 91–107). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Vansteenkiste, M., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerabil-
ity: Basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unify-
ing principle. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 23(3), 263–280.
doi:10.1037/a0032359
Vorster, C. (2011). Impact: The story of interactional therapy. Pretoria, South Africa:
Satori.
Vorster, C. (2016). Interpersonal relationships. In V. Roos (Ed.), Basic interviewing
skills of forensic investigators (pp. 29–38). Potchefstroom, South Africa:
Verbum.
Vorster, C., Beukes, M., & Roos, V. (2013). A psycho-diagnostic tool for psychother-
apy: Interactional Pattern Analyses (IPA). Journal of Psychology in Africa,
23(3), 163–169. Retrieved from http://w ww.tandfonline.com.nwulib.nwu.ac
.za/doi/abs/10.1080/14330237.2013.10820663#.VGC
Watzlawick, P., Bavelas, J. B., & Jackson, D. D. (2011). Pragmatics of human com-
munication: A study of interactional patterns, pathologies, and paradoxes.
New York: Norton.
Wissing, M. P. (2014). Meaning and relational well-being: A reflection on the state
of the art and a way forward. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 24(1), 115–121.
Retrieved from http://d x.doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2014.904100
World Health Organization. (2015). World report on ageing and health. Retrieved
from http://reliefweb.int/report/world/world-report-ageing-and-health
12
Positive Psychology, Close Relationship
Processes, and Cultural Diversity
Stanley O. Gaines, Jr., and Nelli Ferenczi
INTRODUCTION
In a special edition of Canadian Psychology that focused on positive psy
chology (edited by Budworth, 2015), Rao and Donaldson (2015) noted that
the positive psychology movement has been criticized for its lack of sus-
tained attention toward diversity in the conceptual themes of studies and
demographic characteristics of participants. Rao and Donaldson called
attention especially to a lack of gender diversity and ethnic (including racial)
diversity in research within positive psychology. Rao and Donaldson com-
pleted their fact-based review of the literature by suggesting several directions
that future researchers might consider taking within positive psychology
(i.e., positive aspects of ethnic minority group members’ social and psycho-
logical experiences, positive constructs among members of disenfranchised
populations, reinterpreting marginalized constructs from a positive psychol
ogy standpoint, and reenvisioning diversity studies from the vantage point
of positive psychology).
Separately, in a chapter from Positive Psychology of Love (edited by Hoj-
jat & Cramer, 2013), Gaines and Ketay (2013) pointed out that the positive
psychology movement has been faulted for its failure to attend substantively
to culture in research on close relationship processes. Gaines and Ketay
231
emphasized individuals’ racial group membership and socioeconomic sta-

tus as covariates (if not direct indicators) of culture that could be readily
addressed, but frequently are ignored, in studies that draw simultaneously
on positive psychology and relationship science. Gaines and Ketay ended
their theory-driven, empirically informed review of the literature by pro-
moting the use of A. Aron and E. N. Aron’s (1986) self-expansion model—
an extension of Thibaut and Kelley’s (1959; Kelley, 1979; Kelley & Thibaut,
1978) interdependence theory that addresses the relevance of culture and/
or cultural covariates (e.g., race, socioeconomic status) to close relationship
processes—in f uture research from a positive psychology viewpoint.
In this chapter, we draw partly on Rao and Donaldson (2015) and partly
on Gaines and Ketay (2013) in identifying points of intersection among pos-
itive psychology, close relationship processes, and cultural diversity. Due
to space constraints, we limit our literature review primarily to empirical
studies that have examined inclusion of other in the self (A. Aron, E. N.
Aron, & Smollan, 1992)—a construct that was derived directly from A.
Aron and E. N. Aron’s (1986) self-expansion model—as a close relationship
process that helps us in attempting to bridge conceptual and empirical gaps
between positive psychology and cultural psychology (including cultural
diversity issues; see also Gaines & Hardin, 2013). En route to examining the
role of inclusion of other in self in linking positive psychology with cultural
psychology, we briefly review key assumptions within interdependence the-
ory (Kelley, 1979; Kelley & Thibaut, 1978; Thibaut & Kelley, 1959) and the
self-expansion model.
CONCEPTUAL ISSUES REGARDING THE SELF-EXPANSION

MODEL AND INCLUSION OF OTHER IN THE SELF
Conceptual Framework: Interdependence Theory and the
Self-Expansion Model
According to Thibaut and Kelley’s (1959; Kelley, 1979; Kelley & Thibaut,
1978) interdependence theory, a defining property of close or personal rela-
tionships is the mutual influence that partners exert on each other’s
thoughts, feelings, and behavior (Arriaga, 2013). To some extent, mutual
influence may be reflected in the extent to which both partners obtain
rewards and/or incur costs as a result of interaction within a given relation-
ship (Berscheid, 1985). However, mutual influence within close relation-
ships need not take the form of social exchange per se (Berscheid & Reis,
1998). For example, mutual influence is evident when one partner behaves
badly and the other partner responds, not by engaging in relationship-
threatening behavior (which could lead to rewards over the short term,
Positive Psychology, Relationship Processes, Cultural Diversity 233
and costs over the long term, for that partner), but rather by engaging in
relationship-maintaining behavior (which could result in an experience
of costs over the short term, and rewards over the long term, for that part-
ner; Rusbult & van Lange, 2003).
Thibaut and Kelley (1959; Kelley, 1979; Kelley & Thibaut, 1978) originally
conceived interdependence theory as a theory of partners’ mutual influence
on each other’s behavior, first and foremost (Kelley, 1997a). However, Kelley
(1997b) contended that interdependence theory can be readily (re)inter-
preted as a theory that emphasizes partners’ mutual influence on each oth-
er’s thoughts or cognitions. Subsequently, Agnew and colleagues (Agnew,
van Lange, Rusbult, & Langston, 1998) defined cognitive interdependence as
“a m
ental state characterized by a pluralistic, collective representation of
the self-in-relationship” (p. 939). Agnew et al., 1998, operationalized cogni-
tive interdependence largely in terms of the number of plural pronouns
(e.g., we, us, ours) as opposed to singular pronouns (e.g., I, me, mine) that
individuals used when they were asked to reflect on their close relation-
ships. Despite the intuitive appeal of cognitive interdependence as a unify-
ing construct across positive psychology (Gaines & Ketay, 2013) and cultural
diversity (Gaines & Hardin, 2013), we do not know of any published studies
that directly address such a role for cognitive interdependence.
Fortunately (for the purposes of this chapter), Aron and Aron (2010)
explicitly described their self-e xpansion model—which assumes that indi-
viduals are motived to broaden their psychological horizons, largely
through their involvement in close relationships (A. Aron, Lewandowski,
Mashek, & E. N. Aron, 2013)—as a derivation of Thibaut and Kelley’s (1959;
Kelley, 1979; Kelley & Thibaut, 1978) interdependence theory. Moreover,
Agnew and colleagues (Agnew, van Lange, Rusbult, & Langston, 1998) drew
direct conceptual and empirical parallels between their construct of cogni-
tive interdependence and A. Aron, E. N. Aron, and Smollen’s (1992) con-
struct of inclusion of other in the self (i.e., individuals’ incorporation of
material, social, and psychic aspects of their partners’ selves into the material,
social, and psychic aspects of their own selves; Aron & Nardone, 2012). A.
Aron, E. N. Aron, and Smollan operationalized inclusion of other in the self
in terms of individuals’ choice of a particular Venn diagram (physically repre-
senting “self” and “other” as two circles that may or may not overlap, to vary-
ing degrees) among several options. In turn, Agnew et al. (1998, study 1) found
that individuals’ use of plural pronouns was significantly and positively cor-
related with individuals’ inclusion of other in the self. Agnew and Vander-
Drift (2015) concluded that individuals’ self-expansion via inclusion of other
in the self—which, as we shall learn shortly, has been examined in studies of
positive psychology and cultural diversity—yields rewards for individuals
and for their close relationships, over the short term and long term.
Inclusion of Other in the Self as a Self-Expansion Process

In a review of the literature on the positive psychology of romantic love,
Tomlinson and A. Aron (2013) cited results of A. Aron, E. N. Aron, Tudor,
and Nelson (1991, studies 1 through 3) as evidence that inclusion of other
in the self (see A. Aron, E. N. Aron, & Smollan, 1992) represents an impor
tant social-psychological process by which individuals may engage in self-
expansion (as anticipated by A. Aron & E. N. Aron, 1986). Further inspection
of results from A. Aron et al.’s (1991) study 3 in particular indicates that,
within a small sample of married participants within the United States,
inclusion of other in the self was significantly and positively correlated with
the extent of overlap between the cognitive structures of individuals and
their spouses. Moreover, in A. Aron et al.’s (1991) study 3, inclusion of other
in the self was marginally and positively correlated with the proportion of
errors that individuals made when attempting to distinguish between their
own personality traits and the traits of their spouses. Finally, A. Aron et al.
(1991) concluded that, judging from the results of all three studies, individ-
uals’ development and maintenance of close relationships tend to promote
the inclusion of other in the self. All in all, we concur with A. Aron et al.’s
(1991) conclusions with regard to inclusion of other in the self as a mani-
festation of individuals’ self-expansion.
In their aforementioned review of the positive psychology of romantic
love, Tomlinson and A. Aron (2013) also cited results of a large-scale, lon-
gitudinal study of married c ouples in the United States by Tsapelas, A. Aron,
and Orbuch (2009) as evidence that shared engagement in self-expanding
activities on the part of individuals and their spouses tends to facilitate
inclusion of other in the self. Actually, Tsapelas and colleagues demon-
strated that relationship boredom during year 7 of marriages—rather than
shared engagement in self-expanding activities per se—was a significant
negative predictor of inclusion of other in the self (A. Aron, E. N. Aron, &
Smollan, 1992) during year 16 of the marriages, controlling statistically for
individuals’ and spouses’ inclusion of other in the self during year 7. Nev-
ertheless, drawing partly on results of an earlier subset of large-scale stud-
ies in the United States by A. Aron, Norman, E. N. Aron, McKenna, and
Heyman (2000, studies 1 & 2), Tsapelas et al. (2009) operationalized rela-
tionship boredom as a proxy for individuals’ and spouses’ lack of shared
engagement in self-expanding activities. Overall, we believe that Tsapelas
et al.’s results are best interpreted as indirect support for the view (e.g.,
A. Aron & E. N. Aron, 1986) that shared engagement in self-expanding
activities reduces relationship boredom and, consequently, promotes inclu-
sion of other in the self.
Drawing on A. Aron and E. N. Aron’s (1986) self-expansion model, Tom-
linson and A. Aron (2013, p. 8) concluded that love in general (i.e., “the
desire for a relationship with a particular other”) results from individuals’

desire to expand their selves via inclusion of other in the self. In turn, Fehr
and Sprecher (2013) cited results of unpublished studies by Reis (2010) and
by Fehr and Harasymchuk (2009, p. 108) as empirical support for the view
that compassionate love in particular (i.e., “a kind of love that involves giv-
ing of oneself for the good of another [person]”) is significantly and posi-
tively related to inclusion of other in the self. Ideally, one would want to see
findings from published research on the link between compassionate love
(e.g., as measured by Sprecher & Fehr, 2005) and inclusion of other in
the self (i.e., as measured by A. Aron, E. N. Aron, & Smollan, 1992). In the
absence of published relevant research, we contend that it is plausible—but
not demonstrated sufficiently—that the experience of love leads individu-
als to seek self-expansion by way of inclusion of other in the self.
Inclusion of Other in the Self as a Positive

Psychology Construct
In their aforementioned review of the literature on compassionate love,
Fehr and Sprecher (2013) cast inclusion of other in the self (A. Aron, E. N.
Aron, & Smollan, 1992) as a close relationship construct—specifically, as
an index of relationship quality. However, one could argue just as easily (e.g.,
Gaines & Ketay, 2013) that inclusion of other in the self is a positive psy
chology construct. Th ese two perspectives need not be mutually exclusive,
especially if one interprets A. Aron and E. N. Aron’s (1986) self-expansion
model as a conceptual framework that enables relationship scientists to
integrate the literatures from the respective fields of positive psychology
and cultural psychology (e.g., C. Hendrick & S. S. Hendrick, 2013).
What, exactly, qualifies inclusion of other in the self (A. Aron, E. N. Aron, &
Smollan, 1992) as a positive psychology construct? According to the self-
expansion model (A. Aron & E. N. Aron, 1986), inclusion of other in the
self is not inevitably functional for individuals or for relationship pairs/
dyads. A. Aron, McLaughlin-Volpe, Mashek, Lewandowski, Wright, and E.
N. Aron (2004) noted that individuals may underinclude or overinclude
other in the self. Indeed, one important challenge for relationship dyads is
the achievement of optimal functioning, whereby individuals and their
partners strike a delicate balance between including other in the self and
losing one’s self in the other. This relationship-level goal of optimal func-
tioning complements the individual-level goal of attaining well-being, which
includes optimal experience (a construct that is popularly known as sub-
jective well-being within positive psychology; see Diener, Oishi, & Lucas,
2003) as well as optimal functioning (for a review of the literature on well-
being in general, see Ryan & Deci, 2001).
One interesting implication of optimal functioning vis-à-vis inclusion of

other in the self (A. Aron, E. N. Aron, & Smollan, 1992) is that the “fantas-
tic extreme” of virtually overlapping selves that rarely (if ever) occurs across
the duration of a given close relationship (Levinger & Snoek, 1972) is sub-
optimal from the standpoint of A. Aron and E. N. Aron’s (1986) self-
expansion model. A. Aron et al. (2004) pointed out that individuals’ failure
to distinguish their selves from their partners’ selves can result in individ-
uals’ experience of loss of personal control and/or loss of personal identity.
Given the potential role of inclusion of other in the self in facilitating
(1) effects of close relationship processes on the development of individu-
als’ selves and (2) effects of individuals’ selves on the development of close
relationships (A. Aron & Nardone, 2012), the difficulty of individuals’
including other in the self while simultaneously maintaining separate iden-
tities from their partners cannot be underestimated from the vantage point
of positive psychology.
EMPIRICAL RESULTS CONCERNING POSITIVE

PSYCHOLOGY, INCLUSION OF OTHER IN THE SELF,
AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY
Inclusion of Other in the Self and Cultural Diversity:
Links with Race and Socioeconomic Status?
In their study on year 7 relationship boredom, year 16 inclusion of other
in the self, and year 16 relationship satisfaction among married couples in
the United States, Tsapelas et al. (2009) obtained data from a small-to-
moderate-sized sample of African American couples and a moderate-to-
large-sized sample of European American couples. Tsapelas et al. reported
that individuals’ racial group membership and two indicators of individu-
als’ socioeconomic status (i.e., h ousehold income and years of education)
were not significantly or marginally related to inclusion of other in the self,
or to covariates of inclusion of other in the self. Thus, in terms of direct lin-
ear effects, race and socioeconomic status were unrelated to inclusion of
other in the self.
In principle, the categorical or group variable of race might act as a mod-
erator of links among year 7 relationship boredom, year 16 inclusion of
other in the self, and year 16 relationship satisfaction within Tsapelas et al.’s
(2009) study. Furthermore, one could test the moderating effect of race by
conducting a multiple-group structural equation analysis (see Schumacker &
Lomax, 2010) or, alternatively, by comparing the beta weights that link
inclusion of other in the self with its covariates across African American
and European American subsamples (see J. Cohen, P. Cohen, West, & Aiken,
2003). However, as far as we can tell, Tsapelas et al. did not examine race as
a potential moderator. Thus, we do not know what role (if any) race plays in
strengthening or weakening links among relationship boredom, inclusion

of other in the self, and relationship satisfaction among married couples.
Unlike race, the socioeconomic status variables of h ousehold income and
years of education are continuous variables. It is possible that an interac-
tion between h ousehold income and years of education exerts a significant
effect on inclusion of other in the self and its covariates (i.e., relation-
ship boredom and relationship satisfaction). However, Tsapelas, Aron, and
Orbuch (2009) apparently did not create a household income x years of
education interaction term (see Fox, 2008) that could be entered into a
structural equation analysis (see Schumacker & Lomax, 2010) or a path
analysis (see J. Cohen et al., 2003). Consequently, we do not know whether
the product of h ousehold income and years of education explains signifi-
cant (and, perhaps, nonlinear) variance in year 7 relationship boredom, year
16 inclusion of other in the self, and year 16 relationship satisfaction.
Inclusion of Other in the Self and Self-Construals: Links

with Relational-Interdependent and Other Self-Construals?
Relational-interdependent self-construal. Race (e.g., Gaines & Reed,
1994, 1995) and socioeconomic status (e.g., A. B. Cohen, 2009, 2010) typi-
cally are viewed as culturally relevant demographic variables within cul-
tural psychology (e.g., Verkuyten, 2005). However, Cross and Madson
(1997a, b) have argued that gender likewise should be regarded as cultur-
ally relevant—not necessarily on its own, but perhaps as a covariate of a
relational-interdependent self-construal (i.e., understanding of the self in
terms of cognitive frameworks or schemas that organize information about
to the self together with information about significant others; Gaines, 2016).
Influenced by Markus and Kitayama’s (1991) self-construal model, Cross
and Madson proposed that, within the United States, women tend to be
socialized in such a way that maintain fewer (yet more emotionally inti-
mate) relationships than do men; as a result, women generally are more
likely to articulate a relational-interdependent self-construal than are men.
Subsequently, Cross and colleagues (Cross, Bacon, & Morris, 2000, studies
1 through 3) developed the Relational- Interdependent Self- Construal
(RISC) Scale. Across eight large samples in study 1, Cross et al. (2000) found
that (as hypothesized) women scored significantly higher in relational-
interdependent self-construal than did men.
Dalsky and colleagues (Dalsky, Gohm, Noguchi, & Shiomura, 2008) indi-
cated that, across large samples in the United States and Japan, relational-
interdependent self-construal (as measured by Cross, Bacon, & Morris,
2000) was significantly and positively correlated with inclusion of other in
the self (as measured by A. Aron, E. N. Aron, & Smollan, 1992). Similarly,
Mashek and colleagues (Mashek, Cannaday, & Tangney, 2007, study 1)
found that, in a large U.S. sample, relational-interdependent self-construal

was significantly and positively correlated with inclusion of other in the self.
Overall, results indicate that relational-interdependent self-construal cova-
ries positively with inclusion of other in the self. Further research w ill be
needed in order for relationship scientists to determine whether relational-
interdependent self-construal is a significant positive predictor of inclu-
sion of other in the self, especially across time (see Gaines, 2016).
Collective-interdependent and independent self-construals. As
Gaines and Ketay (2013) pointed out, Cross and Madson’s (1997a, b) con-
struct of relational-interdependent self-construal is conceptually and
empirically distinct from Markus and Kitayama’s (1991) construct of
collective-interdependent self-construal (i.e., understanding of the self in
terms of cognitive frameworks or schemas that organize information about
to the self together with information about o thers in general; Gaines, 2016).
However, Cross and colleagues (2000) reported that scores on relational-
interdependent and collective-interdependent self-construals (the latter of
which was measured by Singelis, 1994) w ere significantly and positively
correlated with each other. Unlike relational-interdependent self-construal,
Dalsky and colleagues (2008) found that collective-interdependent self-
construal was not significantly related to inclusion of other in the self (as
measured by A. Aron, E. N. Aron, & Smollan, 1992).
Finally, both relational-interdependent and collective-interdependent
self-construals are conceptually and empirically distinct from Markus and
Kitayama’s (1991) construct of independent self-construal (i.e., understand-
ing of the self in terms of cognitive frameworks or schemas that organize
information about the self separately from information about others;
Gaines, 2016). Using his Self-Construal Scale (SCS), Singelis (1994) found
that, across two large samples in the United States, scores on independent
and collective-interdependent self-construal subscales w ere uncorrelated
with each other. Subsequently, Cross and colleagues (Cross, Bacon, & Mor-
ris, 2000) reported that independent self-construal was unrelated to
relational-interdependent self-construal. Perhaps not surprisingly, Dalsky
and colleagues (2008) found that independent self-construal was unrelated
to inclusion of other in the self (as measured by A. Aron, E. N. Aron, &
Smollan, 1992).
Inclusion of Other in the Self and Cultural Values: Links

with Collectivism and Other Cultural Values?
In their review of the literature on positive psychology, culture, and per-
sonal relationship processes, Gaines and Ketay (2013) drew on the afore-
mentioned study by Dalsky and colleagues (2008) in concluding that, across
large-scale samples in the United States and Japan, collectivism (i.e., an ori-
entation toward the welfare of one’s larger community, broadly defined;
Gaines, 1997) is significantly and positively correlated with inclusion of

other in the self. As it turns out, A. Aron and E. N. Aron’s (1986) self-
expansion model does not directly address cultural values in general (see
A. Aron & Nardone, 2012). Nevertheless, from the vantage point of posi-
tive psychology, one potential manifestation of culture in the inclusion of
other in the self (A. Aron, E. N. Aron, & Smollan, 1992) is the largely adap-
tive value of collectivism (C. Hendrick & S. S. Hendrick, 2013).
Granted that Dalsky et al. (2008) obtained positive covariance between
collectivism (as measured by Yamaguchi, 1994) and inclusion of other in
the self (as measured by A. Aron, E. N. Aron, & Smollan, 1992) across the
United States and Japan, one might wonder w hether individualism (i.e., an
orientation t oward the welfare of oneself; Gaines, 1997) would be a nega-
tive covariate of individuals’ inclusion of other in the self. Indeed, within
cultural psychology, individualism and collectivism have been widely inter-
preted as polar opposites (dating back at least as far as Hofstede, 1980). How-
ever, results of a meta-analysis by Oyserman, Coon, and Kemmelmeier (2002)
indicate that individualism and collectivism are best regarded as orthog-
onal or independent dimensions (see also Oyserman, Kemmelmeier, &
Coon, 2002). Thus, we hesitate to make any firm predictions concerning
covariance between individualism and inclusion of other in the self (partly
because the self-expansion model itself may reflect an individualistic ori-
entation on the part of its creators, as suggested by A. Aron et al., 2004).
The literature on cultural values tends to emphasize the “me-value” of indi-
vidualism and the “we-value” of collectivism (e.g., Hofstede, 1980; Triandis,
1995), to the exclusion of additional “we-values” such as familism (i.e., an
orientation toward the welfare of one’s immediate and extended family),
romanticism (i.e., an orientation t oward the welfare of one’s romantic rela-
tionship pair/dyad), and spiritualism (i.e., an orientation t oward the welfare
of all living entities, whether natural or supernatural; Gaines, 1997). In
principle, any of t hese additional cultural values might covary with indi-
viduals’ inclusion of other in the self (Gaines & Ketay, 2013). However, we
are unaware of any published empirical studies in which familism, roman-
ticism, or spiritualism have been examined as possible covariates of inclu-
sion of other in the self.
Inclusion of Community in the Self: Extending Inclusion

of Other in the Self to One’s Larger Community
Gaines and Ketay’s (2013) review of the literature on positive psychology,
culture, and personal relationship processes noted that Mashek, Cannaday,
and Tangney (2007, studies 1 & 2) have modified A. Aron, E. N. Aron, and
Smollan’s (1992) construct of inclusion of other in the self, such that “other”
is operationalized as one’s community at large, not just one’s significant
other. Drawing partly on Tajfel’s (1981) social identity theory, Mashek and
colleagues developed a measure of inclusion of community in the self that,
like inclusion of other in the self, consists of a series of Venn diagrams (in
the tradition of A. Aron & E. N. Aron, 1986). Part of the novelty regarding
Mashek et al.’s research was the collection of data from a large sample of U.S.
male prison inmates in study 2, complementing their collection of data
from a large sample of university students of both genders in study 1.
Mashek and colleagues (2007) reported that, in study 1, scores on inclu-
sion of community in the self were unrelated to scores on two aspects of
social orientation (i.e., social absorption and social individuation; Ickes,
Hutchinson, & Mashek, 2004). Conversely, in study 2, scores on inclusion
of community in the self were significantly and positively related to scores
on perceived social support (Morey, 1991), although the magnitude of the
correlation was below .20 (thus indicating a relatively small effect size; see
J. Cohen et al., 2003). Based on their findings across studies 1 and 2, Mashek
and colleagues concluded that inclusion of community in the self is unre-
lated to close relationship connectedness in general. However, we hasten
to add that the scales that Mashek et al. used in operationalizing close rela-
tionship connectedness are not widely known and/or widely available to
potential researchers. Thus, we believe that it may be premature to dismiss
inclusion of community in the self as a covariate (and particularly as a pre-
dictor) of close relationship connectedness.
One unresolved issue concerning inclusion of community in the self
(Mashek et al., 2007) and inclusion of [significant] other in the self (A. Aron
et al., 1992) is that Maskek and colleagues (2007) did not comment on the
statistical significance (or lack of same) concerning correlations between
these two self-expansion constructs (following from A. Aron & E. N. Aron,
1986). Just as collective-interdependent self-construal (Singelis, 1994) and
relational-interdependent self-construal (Cross, Bacon, & Morris, 2000) are
significantly and positively correlated, so too might we expect that inclu-
sion of community in the self and inclusion of [significant] other in the self
are significantly and positively correlated. All in all, we believe that more
research on inclusion of community in the self as a potential covariate of
close relationship processes is needed.
CONCLUSION
As is the case with any literature review, the present review concerning
positive psychology, close relationship processes, and cultural diversity is
selective by design (given space constraints). Perhaps the most noteworthy
omission from the present review is the lack of details with regard to indi-
vidual differences in self-e xpansion motivation, which A. Aron, Lewan-
dowski, Mashek, and E. N. Aron (2013) defined as the “[m]otivation to
increase resources, perspectives, and identities in order to enhance [the]

ability to accomplish [one’s] goals” (p. 91). According to A. Aron et al. (2013,
p. 91), individual differences in self-expansion motivation can be measured
via Lewandowski and A. Aron’s (2002) unpublished Self-Expansion Ques-
tionnaire (SEQ; also known as the Self-Expansion Scale). However, published
research by Lewandowski and A. Aron (e.g., Lewandowski, A. Aron, Bassis, &
Kunak, 2006) describes the Self-Expansion Questionnaire as a measure of
individuals’ experience of self-expansion within a given relationship—not
individual differences in self-expansion motivation. In a further complica-
tion, Paolini and colleagues (Paolini, Wright, Dys-Steenbergen, & Favara,
2016) argued that a slightly modified version of the Self-Expansion Ques-
tionnaire measured individuals’ self-expansion expectancies concerning
various close (yet nonromantic) relationships—not individuals’ experience
of self-expansion in a particular relationship. In the absence of published
evidence regarding the construct validity of the Self-Expansion Question-
naire, we suggest that relationship scientists examine the psychometric
properties of this particular survey in greater detail (see Nunnally & Bern
stein, 1994) before making pronouncements about covariance between
scores on the Self-Expansion Questionnaire and scores on other surveys.
Returning to inclusion of other in the self (A. Aron, E. N. Aron, & Smol-
lan, 1992), the empirical links with relational-interdependent self-construal
(Cross, Bacon, & Morris, 2000) and collectivism (Dalsky et al., 2008) sug-
gest that inclusion of other in the self is related to certain culturally rele-
vant psychological variables (although empirical links with culturally
relevant demographic variables, such as race, socioeconomic status, and
gender, have not been demonstrated). Also, empirical links with [absence
of] relationship boredom and [presence of] relationship satisfaction (Tsap-
elas et al., 2009) indicate that inclusion of other in the self is related to cer-
tain close relationship processes (although we w ere surprised by the lack of
published research on inclusion of other in the self as linked explicitly to
the investment model of Rusbult, 1980, 1983; but see also Agnew et al.,
1998, studies 1 & 2, concerning inclusion of other in the self as a signifi-
cant positive correlate of relationship centrality and relationship commit-
ment, prior to aggregating scores on t hese dimensions alongside number
of plural pronouns used). All t hings considered, inclusion of other in the
self shows promise as a positive psychology construct, interdependence
construct, and cultural covariate—a “triple threat” that undoubtedly owes
its conceptual versatility to the richness of A. Aron and E. N. Aron’s (1986)
self-expansion model.
At the beginning of this chapter, we cited Rao and Donaldson’s (2015)
critique regarding the relative lack of cultural diversity within positive psy
chology, as well as Gaines and Ketay’s (2013) critique concerning the rela-
tive lack of research on close relationship processes and cultural diversity
within positive psychology. As the present review indicates, a theory-driven

approach to positive psychology, close relationship processes, and cultural
diversity can generate intriguing research questions (and, at least tenta-
tively, research answers) concerning key constructs that bridge conceptual
and empirical gaps. We believe that our interdependence theory approach
(following Kelley, 1979; Kelley & Thibaut, 1978; Thibaut & Kelley, 1959) is
not the only theoretical route that can lead relationship scientists toward
the integration of positive psychology, close relationship processes, and
cultural diversity; for example, attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969/1997,
1973/1998a, 1980/1998b) suggests that attachment anxiety (Wei, Russell,
Mallinckrodt, & Vogel, 2007) w ill tend to promote individuals’ experience
of a discrepancy between their desired and actual integration of other in
the self (based on A. Aron, E. N. Aron, & Smollan, 1992)—a prediction that
is supported by results from Slotter and Gardner (2012, study 1). By the same
token, we believe that our choice of inclusion of other in the self as a unify-
ing construct is not the only logical choice that we could have made; from
the perspectives of attachment theory (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2013)
and interdependence theory (e.g., Campbell & Stanton, 2013), individuals’
response to relationship conflict can be conceptualized as a positive psy
chology construct (although it is not clear which measure of response to
relationship conflict should be used, or to what extent individuals’ response
to relationship conflict is linked to culturally relevant variables). In closing,
we hope that f uture researchers w ill find the present review to be illuminat-
ing as they seek a path toward bringing together theories and research on
positive psychology, close relationship processes, and cultural diversity.
REFERENCES
Agnew, C. R., & VanderDrift, L. E. (2015). Relationship maintenance and dissolu-
tion. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), APA handbook of personality
and social psychology (Vol. 3, Interpersonal relations, pp. 581–604). Wash-
ington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Agnew, C. R., van Lange, P. A. M., Rusbult, C. E., & Langston, C. A. (1998). Cogni-
tive interdependence: Commitment and the m ental representation of close
relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 939–954.
Aron, A., & Aron, E. N. (1986). Love and the expansion of self: Understanding
attraction and satisfaction. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Aron, A., & Aron, E. N. (2010). Rusbult’s investment model and the expansion of
the self-expansion model. Personal Relationships, 17, 152–154.
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale
and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., Tudor, M., & Nelson, G. (1991). Close relationships as including
other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 241–253.
Aron, A., Lewandowski, G. W., Jr., Mashek, D., & Aron, E. N. (2013). The self-
expansion model of motivation and cognition in close relationships. In
J. A. Simpson & L. Campbell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of close relation-
ships (pp. 90–115). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe, T., Mashek, D., Lewandowski, G., Wright, S. C., &
Aron, E. N. (2004). Including close o thers in the self. European Review of
Aron, A., & Nardone, N. (2012). Self and close relationships. In M. R. Leary & J. P.
Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (2nd ed., pp. 520–541). New
York: Guilford Press.
Aron, A., Norman, C. C., Aron, E. N., McKenna, C., & Heyman, R. E. (2000). Couples’
shared participation in novel and arousing activities and experienced rela-
tionship quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 273–284.
Arriaga, X. B. (2013). An interdependence theory analysis of close relationships.
In J. A. Simpson & L. Campbell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of close rela-
tionships (pp. 39–65). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Berscheid, E. (1985). Interpersonal attraction. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.),
The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 413–484). New York:
Random House.
Berscheid, E., & Reis, H. T. (1998). Attraction and close relationships. In D. T. Gil-
bert, S. T. Fiske., & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology
(4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 193–281). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Bowlby, J. (1997). Attachment and loss (Vol. 1: Attachment). London: Pimlico.
(Original work published 1969)
Bowlby, J. (1998a). Attachment and loss (Vol. 2: Separation: Anxiety and anger).
London: Pimlico. (Original work published 1973)
Bowlby, J. (1998b). Attachment and loss (Vol. 3: Loss: Sadness and depression). Lon-
don: Pimlico. (Original work published 1980)
Budworth, M.-H. (Ed.). (2015). Positive psychology. Canadian Psychology, 56(Entire
Issue 3).
Campbell, L., & Stanton, S. C. E. (2013). Handling conflicts positively. In M. Hojjat &
D. Cramer (Eds.), Positive psychology of love (pp. 134–145). Oxford, UK:
Cohen, A. B. (2009). Many forms of culture. American Psychologist, 64, 194–204.
Cohen, A. B. (2010). Just how many different forms of culture are there? American
Psychologist, 65, 59–61.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/
correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Cross, S. E., Bacon, P., & Morris, M. (2000). The relational-interdependent self-
construal and relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
78, 791–808.
Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997a). Elaboration of models of the self: Reply to Bau-
meister and Sommer (1997) and Martin and Ruble (1997). Psychological
Bulletin, 122, 51–55.
Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997b). Models of the self: Self-construal theory and
gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5–37.
Dalsky, D., Gohm, C., Noguchi, K., & Shiomura, K. (2008). Mutual self-enhancement
in Japan and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39,
215–223.
Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well-
being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual Review of Psy
chology, 54, 403–425.
Fehr, B., & Harasymchuk, C. (2009). Compassionate love in romantic relationships.
Unpublished data.
Fehr, B., & Sprecher, S. (2013). Compassionate love: What we know so far. In
M. Hojjat & D. Cramer (Eds.), Positive psychology of love (pp. 106–120).
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Fox, J. (2008). Applied regression analysis and generalized linear models (2nd ed.).
Los Angeles: Sage.
Gaines, S. O., Jr. (1997). Culture, ethnicity, and personal relationship processes. New
York: Routledge.
Gaines, S. O., Jr. (2016). Personality and close relationship processes. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gaines, S. O., Jr., & Hardin, D. P. (2013). Interdependence revisited: Perspectives from
cultural psychology. In L. Campbell & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Oxford handbook
of close relationships (pp. 553–572). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gaines, S. O., Jr., & Ketay, S. (2013). Positive psychology, culture, and personal rela-
tionship processes. In M. Hojjat & D. Cramer (Eds.), Positive psychology of
love (pp. 218–231). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gaines, S. O., Jr., & Reed, E. S. (1994). Two social psychologies of prejudice: Gor-
don W. Allport, W. E. B. Du Bois, and the legacy of Booker T. Washington.
Journal of Black Psychology, 20, 8–28.
Gaines, S. O., Jr., & Reed, E. S. (1995). Prejudice: From Allport to Du Bois. Ameri-
can Psychologist, 50, 96–103.
Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S. S. (2013). Conclusions/epilogue. In M. Hojjat &
D. Cramer (Eds.), Positive psychology of love (pp. 235–246). Oxford, UK:
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-
related values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Hojjat, M., & Cramer, D. (Eds.). (2013). Positive psychology of love. Oxford, UK:
Ickes, W., Hutchison, J., & Mashek, D. (2004). Closeness as intersubjectivity:
Social absorption and social individuation. In D. Mashek & A. Aron (Eds.),
Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 357–373). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kelley, H. H. (1979). Personal relationships: Their structures and processes. Hills-
dale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kelley, H. H. (1997a). Expanding the analysis of social orientations by reference to
the sequential-temporal structure of situations. European Journal of Social
Kelley, H. H. (1997b). The “stimulus field” for interpersonal phenomena: The source
for language and thought about interpersonal events. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 1, 140–169.
Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interde-

pendence. New York: Wiley.
Levinger, G., & Snoek, J. D. (1972). Attraction in relationship: A new look at inter-
personal attraction. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
Lewandowski, G. W., Jr., & Aron, A. (2002). The self-e xpansion scale: Construction
and validation. Paper presented at the Third Annual Meeting of the Soci-
ety of Personality and Social Psychology, Savannah, GA.
Lewandowski, G. W., Jr., Aron, A., Bassis, S., & Kunak, J. (2006). Losing a self-
expanding relationship: Implications for the self-concept. Personal Rela-
tionships, 13, 317–331.
Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition,
emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.
Mashek, D., Cannaday, L. W., & Tangney, J. P. (2007). Inclusion of Community in
Self Scale: A single-item pictorial measure of community connectedness.
Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 257–275.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2013). Attachment theory as a framework for a pos-
itive psychology of love. In M. Hojjat & D. Cramer (Eds.), Positive psychol
ogy of love (pp. 76–89). New York: Oxford University Press.
Morey, L. C. (1991). Professional manual for the Personality Assessment Inventory.
Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individual-
ism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-
analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3–72.
Oyserman, D., Kemmelmeier, M., & Coon, H. M. (2002). Cultural psychology: A
new look: Reply to bond (2002), Fiske (2002), Kitayama (2002), and Miller
(2002). Psychological Bulletin, 128, 110–117.
Paolini, S., Wright, S. C., Dys-Steenbergen, O., & Favara, I. (2016). Self-expansion
and intergroup contact: Expectancies and motives to self-expand lead to
greater interest in outgroup contact and more positive intergroup relations.
Journal of Social Issues, 72, 450–471.
Rao, M. A., & Donaldson, S. I. (2015). Expanding opportunities for diversity in pos-
itive psychology: An examination of gender, race and ethnicity. Canadian
Reis, H. T. (2010). Everyday acts of compassionate love in dyadic context. Paper pre-
sented at the meeting of Fetzer Institute, Kalamazoo, MI.
Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test
of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16,
172–186.
Rusbult, C. E. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The devel-
opment (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in hetero-
sexual involvements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45,
101–117.
Rusbult, C. E., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2003). Interdependence, interaction, and rela-
tionships. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 351–375.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and h uman potentials: A review of
research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychol
ogy, 52, 141–166.
Schumacker, R., & Lomax, R. (2010). A beginner’s guide to structural equation mod-
eling. New York: Routledge.
Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-
construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580–591.
Slotter, E. B., & Gardner, W. L. (2012). How needing you changes me: The influ-
ence of attachment anxiety on self-concept malleability in romantic rela-
tionships. Self and Identity, 11, 386–408.
Sprecher, S., & Fehr, B. (2005). Compassionate love for close others and humanity.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22, 629–651.
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York:
Wiley.
Tomlinson, J. M., & Aron, A. (2013). The positive psychology of romantic love. In
M. Hojjat & D. Cramer (Eds.), Positive psychology of love (pp. 3–15). Oxford,
UK: Oxford University Press.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview
Press.
Tsapelas, I., Aron, A., & Orbuch, T. (2009). Marital boredom now predicts less sat-
isfaction 9 years l ater. Psychological Science, 20, 1–3.
Verkuyten, M. (2005). The social psychology of ethnic identity. Hove, UK: Psychol
ogy Press.
Wei, M., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). The Experiences in
Close Relationship Scale (ECR)—Short form: Reliability, validity, and f actor
structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88, 187–204.
Yamaguchi, S. (1994). Collectivism among the Japanese: A perspective from the
self. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S.-C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.),
Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 175–
188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13
“Being H uman Together”: Positive
Relationships in the Context of
Diversity, Culture, and Collective
Well-Being
Shelly P. Harrell
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together.

—Bishop Desmond Tutu
INTRODUCTION
The power of humankind to create a world where our highest individual and
collective potentials are realized lies in our ability to embrace our intercon-
nectedness across multiple dimensions of human diversity. However, liv-
ing harmoniously and optimizing thriving for all people have been among
the most elusive challenges in human history. Differences in race, ethnic-
ity, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, social class, and religion have
been the basis of social injustice and structural violence on a macrosystemic
level, as well as harassment and abuse on a relational level. Although creating
“us”versus “them” groups is a function of the very h uman process of social
categorization (Deaux, 2012), when “them” is objectified, dehumanized,
247
denigrated, or seen as a threat, intergroup relationships w ill likely be

characterized by ambivalence, fear, avoidance, or aggression (Fiske, 2009;
Haslam, 2006; Oakes, 2003). Common h uman processes such as implicit
bias (i.e., attitudes and judgments that operate below conscious aware-
ness), ingroup favoritism, and preference for similarity contribute to
social distance and present ongoing challenges to positive relationships
across groups (Cikara & Van Bavel, 2014; Derks, Scheepers, & Ellemers,
2013; Greenwald & Pettigrew, 2014; McPherson, Smith-Lovin, & Cook,
2001). These processes are intensified and maintained by the social strati-
fication of differences and institutionalization of ideologies that define
what is superior/normal or inferior/deviant. At the same time, the human
need for belonging (Baumeister & Leary, 1995) motivates positive intra-
group affiliation and intergroup processes that can affirm identity, vali-
date shared experience, increase sense of community, facilitate self-efficacy,
build self-esteem (personal and collective), provide safety, as well as
decrease stress and facilitate coping (Ball & Nario-Redmond, 2014; Jetten,
Haslam, & Haslam, 2012). The complex dynamics of within-and between-
group processes include both benefits and challenges, promise and peril.
Coexisting with the seemingly intractable challenges of “isms” are count-
less examples and exemplars of p eople who work successfully, love deeply,
and engage in heroic acts of compassion and sacrifice with and for o thers
across differences. The strength of diversity and multiculturalism lies in the
ability to simultaneously honor and transcend differences in order to pro-
mote social justice and contribute to progressing humanity forward. A
focus on relational and collective strengths that can help us better “be
human together” will increase the relevance of positive psychology beyond
individual happiness and fulfillment to the greater well-being of commu-
nities and societies. The American Psychological Association’s (APA) Pres-
idential Task Force on Preventing Discrimination and Promoting Diversity
Report (2012) stated that “it is critical that we radically rethink how we cre-
ate institutions and communities in which differences flourish, power-
based inequities are contested, and democratic participation is encouraged”
(p. 3). Creating social structures where differences flourish brings attention
to the importance of facilitating positive processes at multiple levels of
analysis. Positive psychology’s founding document, the Akumal Manifesto
(Sheldon et al., 2000), states that the emerging field “must consider optimal
functioning at multiple levels, including biological, experiential, personal,
relational, institutional, cultural, and global” (p. 455). Biswas-Diener, Lin-
ley, Govindji, and Woolston (2011) suggest that positive psychology is at a
turning point in this regard.
Consistent with the above is Fincham and colleagues’ call for the develop-
ment of a positive relationship science (Beach & Fincham, 2010; Fincham &
Beach, 2010; Lambert, Fincham, Gwinn, & Ajayi, 2011) and the addition of
the “Connected Life” to the pillars of positive psychology. Beach and Fincham
“Being Human Together” 249
(2010) envisioned that this pillar would “explicitly highlight relationship

functioning and the central role of ‘belonging’ in all its facets,” and called
for positive psychology to reach beyond its “relentlessly Western, individu-
alistic portrayal of h uman functioning” (p. 56). Framing their proposal in
terms of connectedness opens a particularly inclusive space for thinking
beyond close, interpersonal relationships to the facets of belonging and
connection at group, community, organizational, and macrosystemic levels
of analysis. Multicultural settings, immigration, and globalization create
conditions where p eople inevitably interact with o
thers very different from
themselves on multiple dimensions of diversity. The ideal of “being human
together” brings a positive psychology of relationships into the larger socio-
cultural and sociopolitical terrain through attention to the dynamics of
human diversity. This suggests that the study of the “Connected Life” would
be incomplete without attention to positive relationships across differences.
The construct of positive intergroup relations is suggested as an important
area of empirical and applied focus for a positive psychology of relation-
ships, and there is a growing body of research on its antecedents, predic-
tors, and expressions (Ball & Nario-Redmond, 2014; Jonas & Mummendey,
2008; Tropp & Mallett, 2011). The idea of “being human together” encour-
ages a multicultural, inclusive, and contextualized positive relationship
science that studies the multiple facets of relationships and belonging, and
speaks to the importance of optimal relational functioning communally,
nationally, and in the world. As such, this chapter seeks to locate positive
relationships in the context of culture and diversity at multiple levels of
analysis.
RELATIONSHIPS AND POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY IN CONTEXT

From the biological to the global, relatedness at multiple levels of analy
sis has been recognized as among the most significant and impactful ele
ments of the human experience (Feeney & Collins, 2015; Han et al., 2013;
Holt-Lunstad, Smith, & Layton, 2010; Uchino, 2015). Culture is a central
consideration in the what, how, why, and when of relationships (Adams,
Kurtis, Salter, & Anderson, 2012; Campos & Shenhav, 2014; Kim, Sherman, &
Taylor, 2008), and well-being is enhanced when there is a cultural fit
between the person and their socioenvironmental contexts (Campos, 2015;
Soto, Chentsova-Dutton, & Lee, 2013). Culture can be thought of as those
patterns of being, believing, bonding, belonging, behaving, and becoming
that are embedded in social and institutional contexts, internalized as pat-
terns of meaning and identity, expressed through actions and relationships
in the context of power dynamics at multiple levels of analysis, and inter-
active with coexisting and intersecting dimensions of h uman diversity
(Harrell, 2015). It is critical to recognize that culture can impact meaning
such that “psychological traits and processes are not inherently positive or
negative—whether they have positive or negative implications depends on
the context in which they operate” (McNulty & Fincham, 2012 p. 107).
Although some relational processes may exist cross-culturally, their mean-
ing and function can vary. A greater understanding of how relationships
develop, maintain, and transform in diverse cultural contexts would deepen
and enrich an emerging positive relationship science.
However, the development of an inclusive, multicultural, and contextu-
alized positive relationship science is challenged by the individualistic foun-
dations of positive psychology. Since its inception, the field has emphasized
the promotion of personal happiness and the utilization of individual
strengths (Christopher & Howe, 2014) with significantly less attention to
positive groups, communities, and institutions (Biswas-Diener et al., 2011;
Gable & Haidt, 2005; Schueller, 2009). There have been multiple points of
critique raised that encourage greater awareness of cross-cultural variation
in positive psychology constructs and more substantive incorporation of the
cultural-contextual embeddedness and diverse expressions of strengths,
well-being, and positive processes (Constantine & Sue, 2006; Lopez et al.,
2002; Pedrotti, 2014; Sandage, Hill, & Vang, 2003; Schueller, 2009). Progress
for the field in t hese areas is indicated in recent edited volumes by Knoop
and Delle Fave (2013), Marujo and Neto (2014), and Pedrotti and Edwards
(2014) among o thers. However, the integration of culture has been domi-
nated by comparative cross-national studies (Diener, 2009; Park, Peterson,
& Ruch, 2009) and the relative invisibility of historically oppressed, mar-
ginalized, minority-status, and stigmatized (HOMMS) groups within
diverse societies (e.g., African Americans, indigenous p eoples, immigrants).
Issues such as acculturation, cultural identity, cultural strengths, empow-
erment, and liberation have not frequently appeared in the positive psychol
ogy literature. As noted by Gable and Haidt (2005), positive psychology
has had a tendency t oward a one-size-fits-all approach.
An additional critical issue in positive psychology is the underlying
assumption that every individual has the freedom to fulfill personal desires
and instrumental interests. There has been insufficient attention to real
social and institutional barriers that create differential access to resources
(Christopher & Hickinbottom, 2008). T here is inadequate consider-
ation that optimal fulfillment of human needs requires resources that
vary according to social location on dimensions of human diversity such as
race-ethnicity, social class, sexual orientation, and immigration status.
Opportunities and access to valued societal resources (e.g., health care,
safety, education, employment, public esteem, financial security, political
representation, knowledge and information, leisure) are related to positive
well-being, and recent research has indicated the importance of commu-
nity resources and opportunities for the well-being of immigrant and
low-income populations (Delle Fave & Bassi, 2009; Itzhaky, Zanbar, Levy, &
Schwartz, 2015). Access to resources is impacted by stereot ypes, prejudice,
discrimination, and stigma based on difference-related social stratifications
(Frost, 2011; Wilkins, Mollborn, & Bó, 2014). Arcidiacono and Di Martino
(2016) call for a deeper understanding of the mutual interactions of the
environment and well-being that includes attention to the role of power,
liberation, and social justice. They suggest that the complexity of globaliza-
tion, migration, and the existence of power asymmetries and inequalities
present important challenges to psychological efforts to enhance well-being.
Writing in the context of LGBT issues, Meyer (2014) states that it is neces-
sary to “be cognizant of perils of a positive psychology perspective when it
focuses too strongly on individual strengths and less on the institutional
investments required to support individuals” (p. 349). Specific to a positive
relationship science, Walker and Hirayama (2010) suggest that efforts to
build this emphasis area have significant limitations without serious con-
sideration of the many barriers to relationship flourishing that are rooted
in poverty, gender inequality, and other macrosystemic f actors. Prilleltensky
has written extensively on the intersection of macro/political and personal/
psychological processes, advocating strongly that the relationship between
well-being and justice needs greater attention (Prilleltensky, 2008, 2012).
Prilleltensky and Fox (2007) argue that “wellness is achieved by the bal-
anced and synergistic satisfaction of personal, relational, and collective needs,
which, in turn, are dependent on how much justice p eople experience in each
domain” (p. 793). Neither wellness nor justice is distributed fairly in society,
and “the two are inexorably related, primarily b ecause wellness depends on
the just allocation of resources, opportunities, and burdens at the personal,
relational, and collective levels” (p. 794). Schueller (2009) suggests that posi-
tive psychology should focus more on community wellness, including atten-
tion to human rights, distribution of resources, and equality. Roffey (2011)
maintains that fairness is a necessary ingredient for healthy relationships and
suggests that the more equality within a society, the greater the likelihood of
positive and collaborative relationships that can promote growth and well-
being at all levels of analysis.
The link between the personal and the political indicates the need for a
contextually informed approach to conceptualizing h uman strengths and
flourishing that is more nuanced, less overgeneralized, and considers the
full range of social environmental factors that impact optimal functioning
(Becker & Marecek, 2008). McNulty and Fincham (2012) advise that “psy-
chologists need to move beyond examining the main effects of traits and
processes that may promote well-being on average to study the factors that
determine when, for whom, and to what extent those factors are associated
with well-being. Failing to do so will result in an incomplete understand-
ing of the contextual nature of psychological characteristics that could have
harmful implications” (p. 106). Th

ese risks could be minimized by the pres-
ence of a comprehensive guiding metatheory that is inclusive of multiple
levels of analysis and centralizes culture. The individualism and culturally
encapsulated thinking characteristic of the foundational theories and prac-
tices in positive psychology are fundamentally rooted in the tendency
toward decontextualized analyses of human behavior.
A Psychoecocultural Lens for a Positive

Psychology of Relationships
There are numerous context-inclusive theories and models (Bronfen-
brenner, 1994; Kloos et al., 2011; Oishi and Graham, 2010; Prilleltensky,
2008; Sheldon, 2009) that can inform positive psychology’s movement from
its early individualistic positioning to a more relational and contextualized
worldview. In an effort to integrate multiple sociocultural and ecological
approaches, Harrell (2014a) offered a psychoecocultural perspective for the
study of well-being. Individual, relational, and collective wellness outcomes
are conceptualized as emerging from the ongoing transactions within and
between multiple, interconnected biopsychorelational (“psycho”), socioeco-
logical (“eco”), and multicultural/intersectional (“cultural”) pro cesses.
This perspective is illustrated and expanded in person-environment-and-
culture-emergence (PEaCE) metatheory that emphasizes the dynamic
interrelatedness and inseparability of these three systems (Harrell, 2015).
The PEaCE transactional framework (see Figure 13.1) builds on and extends
existing models by explicitly identifying culture as a system that is in ongo-
ing relationship with both persons and environments, as well as specifying
additional ecological levels of analysis (e.g., geopolitical, sociohistorical)
rather than indirectly subsuming them as part of a general macrosystem.
The complex, simultaneous, and interdependent operation of intraindividual
and transpersonal processes (e.g., affective, attachment, identity), environ-
mental levels of analysis (e.g., microsystem, organizational, community),
and multiple intersecting dimensions of cultural diversity (e.g., ethnicity,
gender, sexual orientation) are conceptualized as operating within a
dynamic transactional field. Person-in-culture-in-context transactions that
occur within the field can be pathogenic, neutral, or wellness promoting.
Multiple indicators of positive wellness outcomes and processes (i.e., health
and well-being, resilience, optimal functioning) are conceptualized as emer-
gent phenomena that arise from patterns of person-in-culture-in-context
transactions over time and are never a result of any of t hese systems in iso-
lation. Th
ese transactions are also bidirectional such that aspects of per-
sons, environments, and cultures are transformed by the nature of the
transactions between them. Using PEaCE metatheory as a lens through
Figure 13.1 The Person-Environment-and-Culture-Emergence (PEaCE) Metatheoretical Transactional Framework
(2017 Revision)
which relationships are conceptualized and investigated encourages con-

sideration of how various person-in-culture-in-context transactions might
influence the development, expression, and impact of relational processes
(e.g., trust, empathy). It also encourages consideration of how relational pro
cesses affect not only individual well-being but also the collective well-
being of groups, communities, and societies.
Collective Well-Being and Social Justice:

Facing the Negative and Building the Positive
In his distinguished address to the American Psychological Association
on the role of the behavioral scientist in the civil rights movement, Martin
Luther King Jr. challenged psychologists to use their knowledge of human
behavior to be instruments of social change and to focus on the context of
peoples’ lives rather than individual pathology (King, 1968). Echoing this
call, Csikszentmihalyi (2009) has encouraged positive psychology to go
beyond the direct enhancement of individual well-being to impact the envi-
ronmental, political, and systemic conditions that threaten the well-being
of many. Biswas-Diener et al. (2011) similarly indicate that social justice is
part of the “advent of a new phase in the evolution of positive psychology”
(p. 416) and astutely recommend that “positive psychology needs to ask
individually and collectively, do we have a responsibility to use our work to
help shape a better society?” (p. 414).
However, working toward collective well-being, “the greater good,” and
social justice inevitably involves the willingness to bear witness to the ills
of society, face negative experiences and emotions, as well as to have inter-
personal conflict with those who label resistance and social action as pathol-
ogy. King (1968) understood that the larger, collective well-being of society
required being “maladjusted” to an unjust status quo as reflected in his
often-quoted statement, “The salvation of the world lies in the hands of the
creatively maladjusted.” Rice (2008) frames King’s characteristics of non-
conformity, dissatisfaction, and impatience as virtues when viewed through
the lens of social injustice. King’s life demonstrated that fully manifesting
the strengths of love, citizenship, fairness, bravery, hope, forgiveness, and
integrity required encountering the negative. Wissing and Temane (2014)
observed similar strengths in Nelson Mandela’s work for national healing
and collective well-being in postapartheid South Africa. For both men,
living a meaningful life entailed regularly confronting the realities of rac-
ism, poverty, and violence.
Efforts toward the positive transformation of negative phenomenon
reveal the importance of the positive-negative dialectic involved in pursuing
meaning and purpose that is more consistently being discussed as positive
psychology matures (Lomas & Ivtzan, 2016; Pauwels, 2015; Wong, 2011).
Delle Fave and Soosai-Nathan (2014) suggest that “meaning, in its very
essence, is interconnectedness” (p. 39) and reflects proximal, distal, and
symbolic relationships with self, o thers, and the world. The centrality of
self-transcendence (connection with something larger than the self) brings
together the “Connected Life” and the “Meaningful Life” as inextricably
linked routes to well-being for individuals, groups, and communities. Bridg-
ing this concept to intergroup relations, Migacheva, Tropp, and Crocker
(2011) suggest that when ecosystem goals (meaningful pursuit of what is
good for the w hole) are stronger than egosystem goals (personal needs and
self-interests), the likelihood of positive cross-group interactions is increased.
Ecosystem goals (e.g., collective well-being) require meaningful engage-
ment with h uman differences where we must confront and manage coex-
isting positive and negative aspects of h uman experience. Martin Luther
King’s ultimate ecosystem goal was “the beloved community,” a global
vision for social change where “all people can share in the wealth of the
earth” and where “racism and all forms of discrimination, bigotry, and prej-
udice will be replaced by an all-inclusive spirit of sisterhood and brother-
hood.” It is a vision of inclusion where “love and trust triumph over fear and
hatred” (King Center, n.d.).
How can a positive relationship science contribute to the realization of
King’s beloved community and a world where differences flourish? The
remainder of this chapter will provide a preliminary attempt to inform this
question by exploring (1) the vast research on intergroup relations, (2) appli-
cations of Peterson and Seligman’s character strengths and virtues classifi-
cation to intergroup relations and collective well-being, and (3) literature
on specific cultural and community strengths. The chapter will conclude
by offering a conceptualization of contextualized positive intergroup rela-
tionships and implications for positive psychology research and practice.
Intergroup Relations
There is a broad and growing literature on understanding and improv-
ing intergroup relations (Dovidio, 2013; Huddy, 2004; Pettigrew, Tropp,
Wagner, & Christ, 2011; Shelton & Richeson, 2015; Stephan & Stephan,
2001). Volumes of research studies, conceptual analyses, and intervention
descriptions have been published with implications for understanding
and addressing the challenges of difference. Th ese can generally be divided
into two approaches that target different levels of analysis. The first
approach, intra-and interpersonal change, focuses on knowledge, beliefs,
attitudes, and behaviors that emphasize dyadic and small-group inter-
group interactions. The second approach, community and societal change,
includes efforts to modify the social, institutional, and ideological struc-

tures that provide the contexts within which intergroup interactions
develop and are sustained.
Intra-and Interpersonal Change

Much of the research and practice in this category emerges from Gor-
don Allport’s contact hypothesis proposed over 50 years ago, which holds
that prejudice can be reduced through intergroup contact u nder certain
conditions (Dovidio, Gaertner, Saguy, & Halabi, 2008; Pettigrew & Tropp,
2011). Th
ese conditions are equal status between the groups, common goals,
cooperative intergroup interaction, and support from laws, authority, or
customs. The effectiveness of intergroup contact strategies has been dem-
onstrated in a large meta-analysis of over 500 studies (Pettigrew & Tropp,
2006) and a recent meta-analysis that included a greater number of field
studies (Lemmer & Wagner, 2015). There is strong support for utilizing con-
tact theory as a foundation for conceptualizing and designing interven-
tions targeting the reduction of prejudice. However, methodological
limitations have been noted and needs for ongoing research identified
(Cameron & Turner, 2010; Paluck & Green, 2009). Recent reviews of the
contact literature identify its multiple effects beyond reduction of prejudice
to include increased positive intergroup attitudes (Pettigrew et al., 2011),
as well as reduced physiological reactivity to racially different o
thers (Page-
Gould, Mendoza-Denton, & Tropp, 2008) and increased humanity attribu-
tions to the outgroup (Capozza et al., 2013). The effects have also been found
to generalize beyond those involved in the contact to other outgroup mem-
bers, the outgroup as a w hole, and p eople in other outgroups. Th
ese effects
have been found not only in a variety of contact situations (e.g., classroom,
workplace), but also across nations and diverse sociopolitical contexts
(Pettigrew et al., 2011; Townley et al., 2011). Moreover, vicarious contact
through mass media and even imagined exposure have also yielded posi-
tive effects (Dovidio, Eller, & Hewstone, 2011). A meta-analysis of potential
mediators of contact strategies tested three processes that impact the effects
of intergroup contact: enhancing knowledge about the outgroup, reducing
intergroup contact anxiety, and increasing empathy and perspective taking.
Although knowledge had weaker effects, all three were found to be signifi-
cant in reducing prejudice (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2008).
Intergroup relations strategies have commonly been framed in terms of
reducing negative processes or effects. However, from a positive psychology
perspective, the absence of illness does not guarantee the presence of the
wellness, and the reduction of pathology is not necessarily accompanied by
increased optimal functioning (Gable & Haidt, 2005). Peace psychology
embraces this concept in its distinction between negative peace (the absence
of conflict) and positive peace (the explicit presence of peace-related pro
cesses) (Christie, 2006). Several authors advocate for the study of intergroup
relations that focuses on cultivating positive relations as opposed to the
common focus on decreasing prejudice (Jonas & Mummendey, 2008; Pit-
tinsky, Rosenthal, & Montoya, 2011; Tropp & Mallett, 2011). For example,
positive intergroup relations are maximized when the intervention goes
beyond goal-oriented cooperation to include enhancing trust and warmth.
Cross-group friendship appears to be a particularly effective form of con-
tact that can positively impact intergroup attitudes, foster a sense of accep
tance and inclusion, as well as reduce implicit bias (Davies, Wright, & Aron,
2011). Pittinsky’s work on outgroup liking (allophillia) suggests that the
presence of positive associations with an outgroup involves a different set
of relevant constructs and is predicted differentially than the absence of
negative attitudes (Pittinsky, Rosenthal, & Montoya, 2011).
A number of concepts have been explored that have implications for a
positive relationship science approach to intergroup relations including
empathy (Dovidio et al., 2010), perspective taking (Wang et al., 2014), per-
spective giving (creating space for others to feel seen and heard; Bruneau &
Saxe, 2012), and trust (Tropp, 2009). Findings suggest that affective engage-
ment variables, including intergroup anxiety, play an important role in the
change process with respect to intergroup attitudes and relationships
(Smith, 2009). Contemplative methods that encourage mindfulness, reflec-
tive practice, and deep listening are increasingly being examined in rela-
tionship to reduction of prejudice and implicit bias, as well as in the
promotion of critical engagement with social issues (Kang, Gray, & Dovidio,
2014; Lueke & Gibson, 2014). The constructs of mutual empathy (Jordan,
2000) and social empathy (Segal, 2011) are particularly relevant to inter-
group relations. Mutual empathy is described in relational-cultural the-
ory (a feminist theory of human development) as “not just a way of knowing
another’s subjective experience but a way of actually experiencing con-
nectedness” (Jordan, 2000, p. 1008). It involves relating in ways where there
is acknowledgement that the parties involved matter to each other, are
impacted and deeply moved by the other, and characterized by “feeling safe
in sharing one’s own vulnerability, and of disclosing the impact of the
other person on one” (p. 1010). The construct of social empathy (Segal,
2011) integrates and extends empathy to the larger social context in order
to better understand the experiences of diverse communities and cul-
tures. Social empathy has three components (individual empathy, con-
textual understanding, and social responsibility) and is defined as “the
ability to more deeply understand people by perceiving or experiencing
their life situations and as a result gain insight into structural inequalities
and disparities” (p. 266).
Social Identity
There is a large body of research on the role of social identity in inter-
group relations (Abrams, 2015; Dovidio, Gaertner, & Saguy, 2009; Jetten,
Haslam, & Haslam, 2012). Social identity refers to the collective aspect of
self-concept that reflects identification with a societal group, as well as the
associated value and emotional significance of the group. Social identity has
implications for the nature of relationships from the dyadic (e.g., cross-
group friendships) to the macrosystemic (e.g., international relations).
There is strong empirical evidence that positive social identity (particularly
for HOMMS groups) has multiple psychological benefits, reduces stress,
and enhances well-being (Ball & Nario-Redmond, 2014; Haslam, Jetten, &
Haslam, 2012). Haslam, Jetten, and colleagues have conducted numerous
studies on the health and well-being benefits of mobilizing support around
a valued or salient social identity (Haslam, Jetten, & Haslam, 2012). With
respect to positive group identity, Shih (2004) discusses ways that people
with stigmatized identities are flourishing and identifies a variety of pro-
tective and empowerment strategies that help avoid the negative effects of
stigma. Barbieri, Zani, and Sonn (2014) found that a psychological sense of
community with one’s culture of origin is important for immigrant well-
being. Hornsey and Hogg (2000) suggest that social harmony in intergroup
contexts is increased when subgroups have a secure sense of ingroup
belongingness that is perceived not to be threatened by a dominant out-
group, particularly when this is nested within a superordinate identifica-
tion (e.g., shared humanity). Research on the concept of social identity
complexity suggests that the perception that one has multiple (relatively
nonoverlapping) salient social identities is related to positive outgroup atti-
tudes (Brewer, 2010; Schmid & Hewstone, 2011). Brodsky and Marx (2001)
emphasized the importance of the layers of social identities manifested as
multiple psychological senses of community. Further, the experience of
one’s social identity has also been found to vary with culture and context
(Brewer, 2010).
Ball and Nario-Redmond (2014) suggest that social identity is an untapped
resource for positive psychology interventions and could be utilized to
enhance well-being in HOMMS groups, and enhance intergroup relations
more generally. They provide suggestions for three types of interventions:
social self-definition/redefinition interventions, social identity affirmation
interventions, and collective action interventions. Biswas-Diener and Lyub-
chik (2013) highlight the relevance of social identity in their discussion
of the value of “microcultures” for positive psychology interventions. Social
identity approaches to improve intergroup relations reflect a range of mod-
els that incorporate the importance of activating both superordinate and
subgroup identities (Abrams, 2015). These include a variety of decategori-
zation and recategorization strategies where the salience and inclusiveness
of social identity categories are modified in ways to promote positive inter-

group attitudes and prosocial behaviors (Dovidio, 2013). Wiley and Bikmen
(2012) suggest that intersectionality and social identity approaches work
synergistically to support building solidarity across differences and facili-
tate intergroup collaboration within social movements. Minority group
members experience more positive outcomes in intergroup contact when
the triggered ingroup identity is not u
nder threat. Efforts to silence or sup-
press the distinctiveness of the minority identity, often preferred by the
dominant or majority group, may undermine the willingness of HOMMS
group members to engage in intergroup relationships. A recent study found
that highlighting positive differences can be a facilitating condition for
willingness to integrate into majority culture (Zhang, Jetten, Iyer, & Cui,
2013). A challenge for intergroup relations interventions is that the inter-
group goals of minority and majority groups vary such that assimilation,
seeking commonalities, and acceptance/being liked are salient intergroup
needs of the majority, while multiculturalism, attention to power inequi-
ties, and respect are salient intergroup needs of the minority (Rattan &
Ambady, 2013; Saguy, Dovidio, & Pratto, 2008). Successful interventions
must incorporate consideration of these discrepant intergroup needs and
diversity ideologies.
Intergroup Dialogue
Intergroup dialogue methods are commonly utilized in a broad range of
intergroup relations interventions, and t here is growing support for their
effectiveness (Dessel, 2011; Gurin-Sands, Gurin, Nagda, & Osuna, 2012;
Miller & Garran, 2017; Zúñiga, Nagda, Chesler, & Cytron-Walker, 2007).
Dialogue is distinguished from other forms of communication by its
emphasis on egalitarian participation, creation of a space for collective
engagement, mutual exploration of assumptions, and the potential for
transformation of individuals, relationships, and societal processes (Nichol,
1996). Intergroup dialogue involves engagement across differences to
provide an experience of relational transformation within and outside of
the group that increases the potentiality for action toward social justice.
Singleton (2015) describes conceptual and practical aspects of having
“courageous conversations” about race that include staying engaged,
expecting discomfort, speaking one’s truth, and accepting nonclosure.
Nagda (2006) states that “at its core, intergroup dialogue is an intergroup
relationship-building pro cess that allows for collective exploration of
social identities in the context of social inequalities and promoting social
change” (p. 558). Khuri (2004) focuses on the centrality of emotion, the
inevitability of emotional responses, and the importance of building trust
and positive experiences that enable people to stay engaged when negative
feelings arise, which are seen as integral and not counterproductive. She
emphasizes the creation of empathy, compassion, and movement toward
prosocial behavior that “requires collaborative self-reflection on self, others,
and the world” (p. 599). Schoem (2003) emphasizes the role of justice in the
process, content, and structure of intergroup dialogues, the importance of
thoughtful engagement, and moving people out of “the confining and strati-
fied walls of their segregated comfort zones” (p. 215). Zúñiga and colleagues’
approach emphasize critical reflection and possibilities for collaborative
action (Zúñiga et al., 2007). Dialogue is an important strategy in libera-
tion psychology through processes of humanization, relatedness, and
conscientization (consciousness-raising) (Moane, 2010; Montero & Sonn,
2009), as well as in peace psychology through its emphasis on reconcilia-
tion and building cultures of peace (i.e., trust, understanding, cooperation,
forgiveness, compassion, and reciprocity) (Bar-Tal, 2009; Christie, 2006;
Wissing & Temane, 2014).
Intergroup dialogue has been found to be related to many positive pro
cesses including increased complexity in thinking about diversity, perspec-
tive taking, greater confidence and self-efficacy in intergroup communication,
building alliances and deeper relationships across differences, greater inter-
est in bridging differences, positive beliefs about conflict, increased col-
laboration, increased intergroup understanding, greater understanding of
one’s social identities, increase in concerns about inequalities in society,
and greater commitment to action (Dessel, 2011; DeTurk, 2006). Dialogue
methods are central to building positive intergroup relationships; however,
training competent facilitators is necessary in order to skillfully navigate
the emotional, cognitive, and motivational processes that are activated in
the context of historical and ongoing sociocultural and sociopolitical issues.
Community and Societal Change

Strategies within this approach target a variety of macrolevel contexts
to impact environmental conditions and social inequities that present bar-
riers to positive intergroup relations. These efforts facilitate movement
toward King’s “beloved community” through systems-level interventions.
From the social justice perspective that the nature of intergroup relations
will only be optimal when there is equality, many strategies seek to impact
institutional policy and practices, political processes, as well as legislative
and court decisions. Interventions include facilitating civic participation
and increasing citizen engagement in collective action (e.g., community
organizing) (Lee, Kim, & Phillips, 2015), coalition building and enhancing
relationships between different types of organizations or communities (e.g.,
university-community partnerships, interprofessional collaboration) (Strier,
2011), modifying the social environment to affect intergroup norms and

create a more positive climate for diversity (Matthews, Pepper, & Lorah,
2009), promoting volunteerism and serv ice learning (Omoto & Packard,
2016), and increasing social capital, strengthening social networks, and cul-
tivating sense of community (Cook, 2016).
Given the importance of sense of community for psychological well-
being (Bess, Fisher, Sonn, & Bishop, 2002), a promising approach within
this category involves facilitating institutional support for developing and
sustaining strong microcommunities for HOMMS groups who may expe-
rience exclusion from the larger macrocommunities within which they
function. Th ese social identity microcommunities can provide refuge, sup-
port, security, affirmation, and information on coping in the context of
“isms” (Brodsky & Marx, 2001; Jetten, Haslam, & Haslam, 2012). Paradoxi-
cally, strong connection to a relatively homogenous microcommunity (when
its distinctiveness is recognized and affirmed) can increase willingness and
confidence to step out and engage actively and more confidently in the
larger environment (Zhang, Jetten, Iyer, & Cui, 2013). This is not dissimilar
to recent work on adult attachment extending the significance of having a
secure base for exploring the world to relationships beyond mother-child
(Feeney & Collins, 2015). Examples include the phenomena of single-ethnic
lunch t ables in school cafeterias or cultural dorms and centers at colleges.
However, HOMMS microcommunities can trigger negative reactions from
dominant groups who prioritize assimilation (vs. multicultural) goals and
may perceive social identity group microcommunities as counterproduc-
tive (Bourhis, Montreuil, Barrette, & Montaruli, 2013). Although tensions
between co-occurring goals of community and diversity exist (Townley
et al., 2011), a growing body of research suggests that both needs can be met
through sophisticated, carefully designed interventions that are grounded
in the empirical literature on intergroup relations and take into account
larger sociohistorical and sociopolitical contexts (Cameron & Turner, 2010;
Hornsey & Jetten, 2004).
Liberation psychology and peace psychology offer important applications
within the category of community and societal change. Liberation psychol
ogy strategies are concerned primarily with uprooting oppression through
communal healing and collective action (Moane, 2010; Montero & Sonn,
2009). Interventions involve creating settings and organizational structures
where HOMMS groups can examine the manifestations of oppression in
their lives, where silenced voices can be amplified, and where creative and
spiritual energies can find expression in the service of liberation (Moane,
2010). Additional applications targeting community and societal change
informed by peace psychology include increasing social integration, repara-
tions, political representation, increased economic equality, creating orga
nizational structures to promote reconciliation (e.g., South Africa’s Truth
and Reconciliation Commission), as well as modification of social structures

to increase justice and safety (Christie, 2006; Wissing & Temane, 2014).
Integration of Approaches to Intergroup Relations

The two broad approaches to intergroup relations, intra-and interper-
sonal change and community and societal change, are interdependent.
Interventions targeting psychological empowerment, critical conscious-
ness, or psychopolitical literacy (Diemer, Rapa, Voight, & McWhirter,
2016; Prilleltensky & Fox, 2007) are often implemented at the microsystem
level with a goal of increasing citizen engagement and preparing people for
involvement in social change. Disempowered and disengaged HOMMS
group members who internalize oppression (i.e., believe inferiority-oriented
dominant group narratives) are not likely to participate in their own lib-
eration. The intersection of these two approaches is also illustrated in the
recognition that collective action efforts serve not only to mobilize p eople
to affect larger systemic injustices, but also provide opportunities for p
eople
to work together across differences on a superordinate goal. Social activ-
ism thus also serves to create possibilities for optimal intergroup contact
and the development of positive intergroup relationships. Montero (2003)
suggests that liberation is fundamentally about relatedness and broadens
the space for diversity such that knowledge of self and others is transformed
through relationships. Similarly, Moane (2010) contends that political activ-
ism is always relational, “involving interpersonal processes such as sup-
port, solidarity, and engagement with diversity in groups and communities”
(p. 521). Efforts to increase solidarity between minority and majority group
members to promote social justice, build coalitions between different social
identity groups and organizations, and develop social justice allies are
examples of positive relational processes (Bishop, 2015; Edwards, 2006). The
development of outgroup allies for social justice is a particularly promising
direction for research and practice for a positive relationship science
approach to intergroup relations.
Positive Psychology’s Character Strengths and Virtues

Peterson and Seligman’s (2004) extensive classification, known as the
values-in-action (VIA) character strengths and virtues, includes six broad
virtues (wisdom, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and transcendence)
within which 24 strengths are identified. The authors propose that the VIA
strengths reflect universal wisdom regarding characteristics that facilitate
“the good life,” happiness, and well-being. It is important to note that the
development of the VIA system was dominated by Western thought and did
not draw on indigenous or non-Western philosophical or religious sources

outside of Asia, with the exception of selected Islamic writings. Although
there is some research to suggest that the classification has relevance for
culturally diverse groups (Biswas-Diener, 2006), it is nonetheless impor
tant to be cautious—particularly in relationship to African, Hispanic/
Latino, Pacific Islander, Native American, and indigenous populations.
That said, the VIA strengths have become central to organizing research
and practice in the field, so it is useful to explore t hose strengths that can
be more actively cultivated in the serv ice of developing positive inter-
group relations and collective well-being. Neto and Marujo (2014) exam-
ined the application of the VIA strengths in relationship to community
development and transformative dialogue. There are multiple strengths that
map on to the research on intergroup relations and social justice. The inter-
personal strengths within the virtue of humanity (love, kindness, and social
intelligence) are all clearly applicable to enhancing intergroup relationships.
Developing specific applications of these strengths that target intergroup
relationships would be an important direction. Two VIA strengths frequently
discussed in the reconciliation literature, hope and forgiveness, are also
among the more commonly explored strengths. However, t here are several
additional strengths that have not received as much attention within the field
but have strong potential applications to intergroup relations and collective
well-being. Th
ese include fairness, citizenship, integrity, bravery, humility,
self-regulation, open-mindedness, perspective, curiosity, and creativity.
The most directly relevant strengths are within the broad virtue of jus-
tice and involve relationship between the individual and the community
(Peterson & Seligman, 2004). The civic strengths of citizenship and fairness
entail a strong identification with the common good, a sense of social
responsibility that prioritizes the needs of the w hole over individual desires
and self-interest, and commitment to a moral position of equality where
those who have power do not abuse it to the detriment of others. The
strengths of integrity and bravery fall within the broader virtue of courage,
which generally entails “the exercise of w ill to accomplish goals in the face
of opposition, either external or internal” (Peterson & Seligman, 2004,
p. 199). Specifically, bravery involves “the ability to do what needs to be done
despite fear” (p. 199), and integrity is about speaking the truth and present-
ing oneself authentically even when it is difficult. These strengths are nec-
essary to cultivate in order to endure the challenges of standing for justice
and resisting oppression. The wisdom-related strengths of open-mindedness,
perspective, curiosity and creativity also have particularly strong potential
for specific application to intergroup relations and can work together t oward
facilitating openness and an approach (vs. avoidance) orientation t oward
difference, as well as outside-of-the-box thinking that challenges assump-
tions and the status quo. Moreover, given the social distance between
diverse groups, approaches that can stimulate curiosity and increase knowl-
edge are critical to combat ignorance and stereotypic beliefs. The VIA
strengths of humility and self-regulation included within the virtue of tem-
perance (i.e., refraining from excesses in the service of greater balance)
have important applications to intergroup relations with respect to their
role in decreasing the automaticity of prejudicial responding. In addition
to their significance in reducing implicit bias, self-regulation and humility
are crucial for managing the emotional dysregulation associated with inter-
group anxiety and intergroup interactions characteristic of polarizing
differences.
The VIA strengths provide many possibilities for positive psychology to
contribute to intergroup relations. Recommendations include (1) increased
research on the contextual and culturally situated nature of the VIA
strengths in order to expand understanding of the diverse ways that they
can be expressed (e.g., the feminist and empowerment notion of “critical
hope”; Cahill, Quijada Cerecer, & Bradley, 2010; Christens, Collura, & Tahir,
2013), (2) identifying character strengths that are necessary to support pos-
itive intergroup pro cesses such as intergroup dialogue (e.g., integrity,
open-mindedness, self-regulation), (3) examining the relationship between
character strengths and social justice activism or allyship (e.g., bravery, citi-
zenship, fairness), and (4) developing evidence-based interventions that
target relevant strengths for the specific goals of improving intergroup rela-
tions and fostering aspects of collective well-being. Positive psychology
has the potential to play a strong role in targeting, testing, and populariz-
ing interventions that build strengths such as citizenship and open-
mindedness in the same way it has with the strengths of gratitude and
kindness. Although the VIA character strengths and virtues have g reat
potential for informing a strengths-focused approach to intergroup rela-
tions, it is also valuable to explore research on strengths conducted outside
of positive psychology.
Cultural and Community Strengths to Support Positive

Intergroup Relations
Cultural and community strengths emerge from the sociocultural
environment and provide resources for resilience in the face of “isms” that
can support positive intergroup relationships (Gaylord-Harden, Burrow, &
Cunningham, 2012; Harrell, 2014b). One of the primary advantages of
diversity is the expanded range of strengths and resources available to be
drawn on for problem solving and enrichment of a setting (Lopez et al.,
2002). Although acknowledging the existence of generally universal human
strengths, Pedrotti (2013) encourages the exploration, in teaching and appli-
cation, of strengths that emerge from one’s experience as a member of
diverse sociocultural identity groups. Smith (2006) proposed a strengths-

based counseling model congruent with a positive psychology orientation.
She states: “culture has a major impact on how p eople view and evaluate
human strengths” noting that “all strengths are culturally based” and
encouraging research that focuses on “identifying the cultural strengths
that have permitted members of various ethnic groups to survive and flour-
ish” (p. 17). Harrell, Coleman, and Adams (2014) reviewed the psychologi-
cal and cultural literature on African American w omen and identified
specific culturally infused strengths, suggesting the importance of close
examination of intersectional ecological niches. Culturally embedded
strengths such as soulfulness, audacity, relational knowing, intuition,
sacrifice, orality, protectiveness, and resistant-transgressive-revolutionary
action w ere identified. Other research has identified strengths or resilience
factors in a wide range of specific social identity and intersectionality groups
(e.g., Bowman, 2013; Clonan-Roy, Jacobs, & Nakkula, 2016; Hudson, 2015;
Singh, 2013; Vaughan & Rodriguez, 2014; Wong, 2013). In their discussion
of strengths among the Gullah people of South Carolina, Lopez et al. (2002)
recommend identifying and looking for exemplars among culturally diverse
groups. Vaughan and Rodriguez (2014) discuss strengths of the LGBT
community that appreciates the complexity of the lives of LGBT persons.
Research on cultural and community strengths of HOMMS groups also
appears in the resilience literature. Strengths are framed as protective
factors that emerge in local cultural contexts (Ungar, Ghazinour, & Rich-
ter, 2013). An example of a culturally specific resilience approach particu-
larly compatible with positive psychology is Henderson, DeCuir-Gunby, and
Gill (2016), who reframe the concept of “at-risk” youth as “at-promise” youth
in order to emphasize strengths and assets of youth, families, and commu-
nities. Th
ese approaches are valuable in their recognition of how the con-
textual particularities of a specific ecological niche shape experience and
inform diverse expressions of optimal functioning.
There are numerous strengths at multiple levels of analysis that provide
possibilities for research on developing and sustaining positive intergroup
relationships. Constructs such as cultural intelligence (Brislin, Worthley,
& Macnab, 2006), cultural humility (Gallardo, 2014), collective efficacy
(Roos, Potgieter, & Temane, 2013), multicultural personality (Ponterotto,
2010), racial/cultural socialization (Brown, 2008), positive group identity
(Smith & Silva, 2011; Taylor & Usborne, 2010), positive intersectionality
(Rosenthal, 2016), and positive marginality (Shih, 2004; Unger, 1998) each
involve aspects, antecedents, or correlates of positive intergroup relations.
Harrell and Bond (2006) conducted a thematic analysis of lessons learned
and best practices shared via multiple “diversity stories” (narratives of
intercultural work) and identified three stances that appeared to enhance
relational effectiveness with diverse communities: empowered humil-
ity, informed compassion, and contextualized understanding. Harrell and
Gallardo (2008) described a multicultural worldview as an asset in a diverse

society that involves an attitude of inclusion and the view that h uman dif-
ferences should be valued, honored, and affirmed. A multicultural world-
view embraces “a view of p eople of all cultures as fully h
uman with dignity
and a right to self-determination,” “an awareness of social and economic
asymmetries that confer privilege based on social location,” and “a belief in
the power of interdependencies and interconnectedness across cultures”
(pp. 115–116).
Two additional strengths, biculturation and empowerment, are well-
established concepts that reflect the significance of one’s relationship with
collective identity and relationships with a larger community. Bicultural
adaptation is an important relational construct as it involves the range of
adaptations and strategies for maintaining connection to both culture-of-
origin and the dominant (or host) culture. Although the association between
biculturalism and well-being is complex, t here is strong support for the pos-
itive functions of bicultural identity, competence, and flexibility (Benet-
Martinez & Haritatos, 2005). Empowerment can be considered a strength
that manifests at multiple levels of analysis and has particu lar promise
for a contextualized positive relationship science (Cattaneo & Chapman,
2010; Zimmerman, 1995). Christens (2012) defines psychological empow-
erment as “the psychological aspects of processes by which p eople gain
greater control over their lives, participate in democratic decision-making,
and develop critical awareness of their sociopolitical environments” (p. 114).
The relational dimension of empowerment emphasizes that it develops
within empowering relationships and empowering settings (Christens,
2012; Maton, 2008). Impactful interpersonal relationships are central for
fostering empowerment. With respect to intergroup relations, empower-
ment is an important process to facilitate voice, visibility, and a place at the
decision-making table for members of HOMMS groups in their interac-
tions with dominant group members.
Finally, since intergroup relationships form and transform within larger
social contexts, a greater understanding of positive communities could
provide insight t oward nurturing positive intergroup relations. Positive com-
munities have been studied from the perspectives of community empower-
ment, community capacity, community resilience, community well-being,
and community development (Christens, 2012; Green, 2010; Lee, Kim, &
Phillips, 2015; Maton, 2008; Murray & Zautra, 2011; Neto & Marujo, 2014).
Features that occur commonly across these approaches include focusing
on existing community assets (vs. problems and deficits), building social
capital and networks, enhancing competence (e.g., knowledge and skills,
community organizing, leadership), mobilizing resources in times of need;
facilitating empowerment, establishing and maintaining partnerships
and coalitions, and attention to intracommunity diversity. All of these
approaches put heavy emphasis on relational factors indicating that com-

munity capacity hinges on the nature of internal and external relationships.
Noting the commonalities between positive psychology and community
development, Linley, Bhaduri, Sen Sharma, and Govindji (2011) describe
work that explores applications of a strengths-based approach in marginal-
ized communities. Attention to relationships between and within commu-
nities is an important potential avenue for research relevant to understanding
and promoting the “Connected Life.”
CONTEXTUALIZED POSITIVE INTERGROUP RELATIONS

The body of work reviewed h ere has implications for developing a com-
prehensive conceptualization of contextualized positive intergroup rela-
tions. There are not many explicit definitions of the construct of positive
intergroup relationships in the literature. Jonas and Mummendey (2008)
suggest important elements such as mutuality and positive processes
between groups (e.g., appreciation, attraction, admiration). Pittinksy, Rosen-
thal, and Montoya identified five aspects of allophilia (outgroup liking):
affection, comfort, kinship, engagement, and enthusiasm. A related con-
cept, growth-fostering relationships (from relational-cultural theory)
has been specifically applied to addressing multicultural and social justice
challenges (Comstock et al., 2008). Th ese are relationships characterized
by mutual empathy, mutual empowerment, relational awareness, affirma-
tion of one’s worth, and where creativity, productivity, and zest for life are
enhanced. Informed by a synthesis of relevant literature, seven core features
of contextualized positive intergroup relations are offered here. Within
the PEaCE metatheoretical framework, positive intergroup relations are
conceptualized as emerging from particular patterns and expressions of
person-in-culture-in-context transactions. These optimal intergroup trans-
actions (OITs) emphasize the relative, contextualized nature of relation-
ships that always involve coexisting person, environment, and cultural
systems. Intergroup contact experienced as positive in one set of person-
in-culture-in-context transactions may not be positive in a different per-
son-environment-culture transactional space. Given the sociopolitically
infused and historically situated challenges to intergroup relationships, as
well as the ever-present dynamics of social categorization and social iden-
tity, the frame of optimal transactions captures the complex nature of inter-
group contact where what is optimal is context-dependent and may not
continuously feel “good” or “positive.” OITs are comprised of combinations
of experientially positive and negative interactions necessary for transpar-
ent, enduring, and mutual intergroup relationships to thrive. One of the
challenges for the development of positive intergroup relationships is that
dominant and subordinated groups frequently have different ideas of what

“positive” means: color-blind assimilation or justice-focused multicultural-
ism (Rattan & Ambady, 2013). For a relationship to be positively perceived
by both parties, there must be room for voicing and contextualizing both
sentiments.
Thus, it is suggested h
ere that contextualized positive intergroup relations
evolve and emerge from an accumulation of OITs over time that occur
between two or more entities who differ within stratified social identity cat-
egories. Contextualized positive intergroup relations:
1. honor the inherent dignity and humanity of others as existing within

layered sociohistorical and sociopolitical contexts;
2. affirm and provide opportunities to highlight both superordinate and
distinctive social identities in ways that make room for differences and
similarities to coexist;
3. welcome, encourage, and create space for authenticity and truth telling,
both one’s own and others, such that participants experience being fully
seen and heard with acknowledgment and awareness of their contex-
tualized experiences;
4. engage through interactions and meaningful dialogue characterized by
the presence of mutuality, recognition of interdependencies and shared
history, positive attributions, experiences of connectedness, increasing
comfort in interactions, cognitive and behavioral flexibility, apprecia-
tion, humility, trust, respect, and empathy;
5. enhance and contribute to the development and expression of strengths
and promote empowerment, growth, and transformation such that the
best of all parties has the opportunity to emerge t oward a larger goal
of enhanced collective well-being;
6. challenge preconceptions and projections through the courage and
willingness to identify one’s own biases, as well as recognize and resist
oppressive power dynamics that may arise in the interaction; and
7. commit to tolerating uncertainty and intergroup anxiety, mobilizing
the stamina and sustained engagement necessary for recovery from
relational ruptures, and utilizing inevitable points of conflict as oppor-
tunities for deepening understanding.
These seven features inform the following definition: contextualized

positive intergroup relations are humanizing processes that emerge from
extended, growth-promoting interactions among people across stratified
social identities where both differences and commonalities are embraced
and processed with a coexistent critical consciousness of the historically sit-
uated, culturally infused context, and current sociopolitical dynamics; they
are characterized by intentional and proactive efforts to honor, welcome,
affirm, engage, enhance, challenge, and commit through meaningful and

authentic interactions in the service of personal, relational, and collective
transformation t oward greater equality and justice. This is to be distin-
guished from a positive interpersonal relationship with someone who is
different. The latter refers to interactions where the intergroup aspects are
not salient and may be actively or passively minimized or avoided. The
distinction centers on the relative invisibility or silencing of social identity
differences and sometimes subtle collusion to suppress, deny, or ignore
discomfort through selective or exclusive emphasis on commonalities.
These positive interpersonal relationships across differences feel experien-
tially pleasant and are helpful for humanization of the other and reducing
intergroup anxiety. However, they are limited in their potential for trans-
formative growth individually or collectively and can function to normal-
ize existing power asymmetries and sustain the status quo.
Positive intergroup relations cannot be achieved solely through activi-
ties that celebrate differences via appreciation of material artifacts such as
food, music, and art, nor through blissful retreats into a peace-and-love
consciousness. Th ese feel-good opportunities are important in their cumu-
lative value t oward building a reservoir of positivity and may be important
at early stages of interventions and training (Schoem, 2003). However, they
are insufficient for sustained positive transformation of intergroup rela-
tions. An analogy at an interpersonal level of analysis would be early ver-
balizations of love and giving presents in a romantic relationship. Such
behaviors feel good and may occur in positive relationships; however, they
can also occur in abusive relationships. In order to be enduring, substan-
tive, and have transformative potential, positive intergroup relations must
be growth promoting and built on a firm ground of equality, mutuality,
transparency, safety, and trust in the context of recognizing and resisting
socially embedded power asymmetries. This is often only achieved via chal-
lenging “go through it to get to it” experiences that require the stamina
and commitment to sustain engagement in cycles of connection, discon-
nection, and transformed reconnection necessary for meaningful and
optimal intergroup transactions over time (Comstock et al., 2008). The
definition of contextualized positive intergroup relationships offered here
should be considered a preliminary starting point for f uture theoretical,
empirical, and applied work.
CONCLUSION
In pondering the possibilities of “a positive psychology that matters,”
Lopez and Magyar-Moe (2006) pose the question, “And what if we w ere to
commit ourselves to another big dream, increasing social harmony in our
communities?” (p. 327). The world is in need of science to step up and
participate even more actively in movement toward King’s beloved com-

munity. Development of a multicultural, inclusive, and contextualized
positive psychology of relationships puts the field in the position to be a
participant in this “big dream” through explicit attention to positive inter-
group relations. In the context of human diversity, four issues deserve
greater attention in building a positive relationship science. First, it is criti-
cal that the types of relationships under investigation be expanded beyond
the dyadic and familial (e.g., marriage, friendship, parental) to include rela-
tionships within and between groups, communities, and nations. Second,
there must be consistent awareness of the role that culture and context
play in understanding the features and determinants of positive relation-
ships in order to avoid imposing a culture-blind or culturally encapsulated
single standard of what is desirable and good. Third, the synergies between
positive relational experiences and the challenges, conflicts, and “negative”
aspects of building positive relationships must be integrated in order to
capture the complexity of a connected life. This includes confronting and
resisting those ideologies and societal structures that maintain social injus-
tices and create obstacles to optimally functioning intergroup relationships.
Fourth, it is important to study the implications of positive relationship
processes for collective well-being (e.g., communities, societies), not just
for the happiness or personal growth of the individual.
Increased attention to positive relationships for diverse p eople in diverse
contexts is an important direction for positive psychology research and
practice. Expanding positive psychology’s field of awareness to consciously
and consistently include contextual, institutional, and cultural factors is
both well within the founding philosophy of positive psychology, as well as
a professional mandate. Movement toward a positive psychology that is
ever-mindful of the multiple social and environmental contexts within
which all of human behavior occurs will bring the field closer to the vision
of the Akumal Manifesto. This orientation can support the field’s develop-
ing cultural inclusiveness by applying the questions of “for whom” and
“under what conditions” to all conceptual, empirical, and applied efforts.
A grounding metatheory such as the person-environment-and-culture-
emergence (PEaCE) framework (Harrell, 2015, 2016) can ensure that the
work does not lose sight of culture and context. This approach positions
relationships as developing within the field of person-in-culture-in-context
transactions. The implication is that positive relationships emerge as a func-
tion of culturally infused aspects of individuals in ongoing transaction
with culturally shaped and multiply embedded environments. As Christo-
pher and Howe (2014) stated, to remain relevant, positive psychology must
“speak to all of humanity” (p. 254).
There is much promise for a positive relationship science approach to
intergroup relations. Contributions could include (1) articulation of a pro-
gram of research to test dimensions, determinants, and correlates of positive
intergroup relations; (2) exploration of the role of culture in what is

understood and experienced as positive in relationships; (3) identification
and promotion of personal, relational, organ izational, community, and
cultural strengths that facilitate positive intergroup relations in various
sociopolitical contexts; (4) the role of meaning-making in the inevitable
coexistence of positive and negative emotions in intergroup relations; and
(5) the development of culturally informed positive intergroup interven-
tions at multiple levels of analysis. Positive intergroup relations is proposed
as fertile area of study for a multicultural, inclusive, and contextualized pos-
itive psychology of relationships that can inform an expanded understand-
ing of the “Connected Life” and, more importantly, engage the field in
creating a world where differences flourish and that optimizes ways we can
better “be h uman together.”
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author would like to gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Jessica
Styles, Eneyew Girma, Je’Nae Johnson, and Jem Powell in the preparation of
this chapter, and the valuable commentary and suggestions from Caitlin
Sorenson, Francesca Parker, and Miguel Gallardo.
REFERENCES
Abrams, D. (2015). Social identity and intergroup relations. In M. Mikulincer &
P. R. Shaver (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology: Vol.
2. Group processes (pp. 203–228). Washington, DC: American Psychologi-
cal Association. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/14342-0 08
Adams, G., Kurtiş, T., Salter, P. S., & Anderson, S. L. (2012). A cultural psychology
of relationship: Decolonizing science and practice. In G. Adams, T. Kurtis,
S. S. Salter, & S. L. Anderson (Eds.), Relationship science: Integrating evolu-
tionary, neuroscience, and sociocultural approaches (pp. 49–70). Washing-
ton, DC. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://doi
.org/10.1037/13489-0 03
American Psychological Association, Presidential Task Force on Preventing Dis-
crimination and Promoting Diversity Report. (2012). Dual pathways to a
better America: Preventing discrimination and promoting diversity. Wash-
ington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://
www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/promoting-diversity.aspx
Arcidiacono, C., & Di Martino, S. (2016). A critical analysis of happiness and well-
being, where we stand now, and where we need to go. Community Psychol
ogy in Global Perspective, 2(1), 6–35. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1285
/i24212113v2i1p6
Ball, T. C., & Nario-Redmond, M. R. (2014). Positive social identity interventions:
Finding a conduit for well-being in stigmatized group memberships. In
A. C. Parks & S. M. Schueller (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of posi-

tive psychological interventions (pp. 327–343). New York: Wiley. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118315927.ch18
Barbieri, I., Zani, B., & Sonn, C. (2014). Meanings of community in context of mul-
ticulture: The role of citizenship, identity, and cultural changes. Journal of
Community Psychology, 42(8), 980–996. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.1002/jcop.21666.
Bar-Tal, D. (2009). Reconciliation as a foundation for cultures of peace. In J. de
Rivera (Ed.), Handbook on building cultures of peace (pp. 363–377). New
York: Springer.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human-motivation. Psychological Bulletin,
117(3), 497–529. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/0 033-2909.117.3.497
Beach, S. R. H., & Fincham, F. D. (2010). Conflict can be constructive: Reflections
on the dialectics of relationship science. Journal of F amily Theory & Review,
2(1), 54–57. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00038.x
Becker, D., & Marecek, J. (2008). Positive psychology: History in the remaking? The-
ory and Psychology, 18(5), 591–604. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177
/0959354308093397
Benet-Martinez, V., & Haritatos, J. (2005). Bicultural Identity Integration (BII):
Components and psychosocial antecedents. Journal of Personality, 73(4),
1015–1050. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00337.x
Bess, K. D., Fisher, A. T., Sonn, C. C., & Bishop, B. J. (2002). Psychological sense of
community: Theory, research, and application. In A. T. Fisher, C. C. Sonn,
& B. J. Bishop (Eds.), Psychological sense of community: Research, applica-
tions, and implications (pp. 3–22). New York: Kluwer.
Bishop, A. (2015). Becoming an ally: Breaking the cycle of oppression in p eople
(3rd ed.). Nova Scotia: Fernwood.
Biswas-Diener, R. (2006). From the equator to the north pole: A study of character
strengths. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7(3), 293–310. doi:10.1007/s10902
-005-3646-8
Biswas-Diener, R., Linley, P. A., Govindji, R., & Woolston, L. (2011). Positive psychol
ogy as a force for social change. In K. M. Sheldon, T. Kashdan, & R. Steger
(Eds.), Designing positive psychology: Taking stock and moving forward
(pp. 410–418). New York: Oxford University Press.
Biswas-Diener, R., & Lyubchik, N. (2013). Microculture as a contextual positive
psychology intervention. In J. Ciarrochi & T. B. Kashdan (Eds.), Mindful-
ness, accept ance, and positive psychology: The seven foundations of well-
being (pp. 194–210). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.
Bourhis, R. Y., Montreuil, A., Barrette, G., & Montaruli, E. (2013). Acculturation
and immigrant-host community relations in multicultural settings. In
S. Demoulin, J. Leyens, & J. F. Dovidio (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstand-
ings: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 40–61). New York: Taylor and
Francis.
Bowman, P. J. (2013). A strengths-based social psychological approach to resiliency:
Cultural diversity, ecological, and lifespan issues. In S. Prince-Embury &
D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), Resilience in children, adolescents, and adults: Trans-

lating research into practice (pp. 299–324). New York: Springer. doi:10.100
7/978-1-4614-4939-3_21
Brewer, M. B. (2010). Social identity complexity and acceptance of diversity. In
R. J. Crisp (Ed.), The psychology of social and cultural diversity (pp. 10–33).
Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell.
Brislin, R., Worthley, R., & Macnab, B. (2006). Cultural intelligence: Understand-
ing behaviors that serve people’s goals. Group & Organization Management,
31(1), 40–55. doi:10.1177/1059601105275262
Brodsky, A. E., & Marx, C. (2001). Layers of identity: Multiple psychological sense
of community within a community setting. Journal of Community Psychol
ogy, 29(2), 161–178. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6629
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecological models of human development: Readings on
the Development of Children. New York: Freeman.
Brown, D. L. (2008). African American resiliency: Examining racial socialization
and social support as protective factors. Journal of Black Psychology, 34(1),
32–48. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0 095798407310538
Bruneau, G. E., & Saxe, R. (2012). The power of being heard: The benefits of
“perspective-giving” in the context of intergroup conflict. Journal of Exper-
imental Social Psychology, 48(4), 1–47. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.jesp.2012.02.017
Cahill, C., Quijada Cerecer, D., & Bradley, M. (2010). “Dreaming of . . .”: Reflections
on participatory action research as a feminist praxis of critical hope. Affilia:
Journal of W omen and Social Work, 25(4), 406–416. doi:10.1177/0886109
910384576
Cameron, L., & Turner, R. N. (2010). The application of diversity-based interven-
tions to policy and practice. In R. J. Crisp (Ed.), The psychology of social and
cultural diversity (pp. 322–351). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002
/9781444325447.ch14
Campos, B. (2015). What is the role of culture in the association of relationships
with health? Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9(11), 661–677.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12226
Campos, B., & Shenhav, S. (2014). Relationships in multicultural contexts. In
J. Teramoto Pedrotti and L. M. Edwards (Eds.), Perspectives on the intersec-
tion of multiculturalism and positive psychology (pp. 93–105). New York:
Springer.
Capozza, D., Trifiletti, E., Vezzali, L., & Favara, I. (2013). Can intergroup contact
improve humanity attributions? International Journal of Psychology, 48(4),
527–541.
Cattaneo, L. B., & Chapman, A. R. (2010). The process of empowerment: A model
for use in research and practice. American Psychologist, 65(7), 646–659.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018854
Christens, B. D. (2012). Targeting empowerment in community development: A
community psychology approach to enhancing local power and well-being.
Community Development Journal, 47(4), 538–554. Retrieved from https://
doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bss031
Christens, B. D., Collura, J. J., & Tahir, F. (2013). Critical hopefulness: A person-
centered analysis of the intersection of cognitive and emotional empower-
ment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 52, 170–184. doi:10.1007/
s10464-013-9586-2
Christie, D. J. (2006). What is peace psychology the psychology of? Journal of Social
Issues, 62(1), 1–17. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2006
.0 0436.x
Christopher, J. C., & Hickinbottom, S. (2008). Positive psychology, ethnocentrism,
and the disguised ideology of individualism. Theory & Psychology, 18(5),
563–589. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354308093396
Christopher, J. C., & Howe, K. L. (2014). Future directions for a more multicultur-
ally competent (and h umble) positive psychology. In J. T. Pedrotti and L. M
Edwards (Eds.), Perspectives on the intersection of multiculturalism and pos-
itive psychology (pp. 253–266). New York: Springer.
Cikara, M., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2014). The neuroscience of intergroup relations: An
integrative review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(3), 245–274.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614527464
Clonan-Roy, K., Jacobs, C. E., & Nakkula, M. J. (2016). Towards a model of positive
youth development specific to girls of color: Perspectives on development,
resilience, and empowerment. Gender Issues, 33(2), 96–121. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-016-9156-7
Comstock, D. L, Hammer, T. R., Strentzsch, J., Cannon, K., Parsons, J., & Salazar,
G. (2008). Relational-cultural theory: A framework for bridging relational,
multicultural, and social justice competencies. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 86, 279–287. Retrieved from http://d x.doi.org/10.1177/019
3392202027003002
Constantine, M. G., & Sue, D. W. (2006). Factors contributing to optimal human
functioning in people of color in the United States. The Counseling Psychol-
ogist, 34(2), 228–244. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0 011000005
281318
Cook, J. R. (2016). Strategies for building social capital. In A. G. Greenberg &
M. Bloom (Eds.), Social capital and community well-being: The Serve H ere
Initiative (pp. 141–159). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Retrieved from https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33264-2
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2009). The promise of positive psychology. Psychological
Topics, 18(2), 203–211.
Davies, K., Wright, S. C., & Aron, A. (2011). Cross-group friendships: How inter-
personal connections encourage positive intergroup attitudes. In L. R.
Tropp & R. K. Mallett (Eds.), Moving beyond prejudice to positive intergroup
relations: Pathways to positive intergroup relations (pp. 119–138). Washing-
ton, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://doi.
org/10.1037/12319-0 06
Deaux, K. (2012). Categories we live by. In S. Wiley, G. Philogène, & T. A. Reven-
son (Eds.), Social categories in everyday experience (pp. 205–217). Washing-
ton, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://doi.
org/10.1037/13488-011
Delle Fave, A., & Bassi, M. (2009). Sharing optimal experiences and promoting
good community life in a multicultural society. Journal of Positive Psychol
ogy, 4(4), 280–289. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/174397609029
33716
Delle Fave, A., & Soosai-Nathan, L. (2014). Meaning as inter-connectedness: The-
oretical perspectives and empirical evidence. Journal of Psychology in Africa,
24(1), 33–43. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2014.904090
Derks, B., Scheepers, D., & Ellemers, N. (Eds.) (2013). Neuroscience of prejudice and
intergroup relations. New York: Psychology Press/Taylor and Francis.
Dessel, A. B. (2011). Dialogue and social change: An interdisciplinary and trans-
formative history. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 81(2–3), 167–183.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/0 0377317.2011.588561
DeTurk, S. (2006). The power of dialogue: Consequences of intergroup dialogue and
their implications for agency and alliance building. Communication Quar-
terly, 54(1), 33–51. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370500
270355
Diemer, M. A., Rapa, L. J., Voight, A. M., & McWhirter, E. H. (2016). Critical con-
sciousness: A developmental approach to addressing marginalization and
oppression. Child Development Perspectives, 10(4), 216–221. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12193
Diener, E. (Ed.). (2009). Culture and well-being: The collected works of Ed Diener.
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-2352-014
Dovidio, J. F. (2013). Bridging intragroup processes and intergroup relations: Need-
ing the twain to meet. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52, 1–24.
doi:10.1111/bjso.12026
Dovidio, J. F., Eller, A., & Hewstone, M. (2011). Improving intergroup relations
through direct, extended and other forms of indirect contact. Group Pro
cesses & Intergroup Relations, 14(2), 147–160. doi:10.1177/1368430210390555
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Saguy, T. (2009). Commonality and the complexity
of “we”: Social attitudes and social change. Personality and Social Psychol
ogy Review, 13(3), 3–20. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683
08326751
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Saguy, T., & Halabi. (2008). From when to why: Under-
standing how contact reduces bias. In U. Wagner, L. R. Tropp, G. Finchil-
escu, & C. Tredoux (Eds.), Improving intergroup relations: Building on the
legacy of Thomas F. Pettigrew (pp. 75–90). New York: Blackwell.
Dovidio, J. F., Johnson, J. D., Gaertner, S. L., Pearson, A. R., Saguy, T., & Ashburn-
Nardo, L. (2010). Empathy and intergroup relations. In M. Mikulincer &
P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior: The better
angels of our nature (pp. 393–408). Washington, DC: American Psychologi-
cal Association. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/12061-020
Edwards, K. E. (2006). Aspiring social justice ally identity development: A concep-
tual model. NASPA Journal, 43(4), 39–60. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.2202/1949-6605.1722
Feeney, B. C., & Collins, N. L. (2015). A new look at social support: A theoretical
perspective on thriving through relationships. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 19(2), 113–147. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177

/1088868314544222
Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (2010). Of memes and marriage: Toward a posi-
tive relationship science. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 2(1), 4–24.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.0 0033.x
Fiske, S. T. (2009). From dehumanization and objectification to rehumanization:
Neuroimaging studies on the building blocks of empathy. Annals of the New
York Academy of Sciences, 1167, 31–34. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04544.x
Frost, D. M. (2011). Social stigma and its consequences for the socially stigmatized.
Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(11), 824–839. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1177/0 011000005283521
General Psychology, 9(2), 103–110. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037
/1089-2680.9.2.103
Gallardo, M. E. (Ed.). (2014). Developing cultural humility: Embracing race, privi-
lege, and power. Los Angeles: Sage.
Gaylord-Harden, N. K., Burrow, A. L., & Cunningham, J. A. (2012). A cultural-asset
framework for investigating successful adaptation to stress in African
American youth. Child Development Perspectives, 6(3), 264–271. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.0 0236.x
Green, G. P. (2010). Community assets: Building the capacity for development. In
G. P. Green & A. Goetting (Eds.), Mobilizing communities: Asset building as
a community development (pp. 1–13). Philadelphia: T emple University Press.
Greenwald, A. G., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2014). With malice toward none and charity
for some: Ingroup favoritism enables discrimination. American Psycholo-
gist, 69(7), 669–684. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036056
Gurin-Sands, C., Gurin, P., Nagda, B. A., & Osuna, S. (2012). Fostering a commit-
ment to social action: How talking, thinking, and feeling make a difference
in intergroup dialogue. Equity & Excellence in Education, 45(1), 60–79.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2012.643699
Han, S., Northoff, G., Vogeley, K., Wexler, B. E., Kitayama, S., & Varnum, M. E. W. W.
(2013). A cultural neuroscience approach to the biosocial nature of the
human brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 335–359. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-071112-054629
Harrell, S. P. (2014a). A psychoecocultural perspective on positive psychology and
well-being. The California Psychologist, 47(2), 8–11.
Harrell, S. P. (2014b, September). Re-visioning strengths and virtues in the context
of gender and culture. Presented at the conference of the Western Positive
Psychology Association, Claremont, CA.
Harrell, S. P. (2015). Culture, community, and world PEaCE: An introduction to
Person-Environment-and-Culture-Emergence theory. Community Psychol
ogy in Global Context, 1(1), 16–49.
Harrell, S. P. (2016, March). Practicing PEaCE: Culture, community and psychother-
apy. Presented at the annual UCLA Interpersonal Neurobiology Confer-
ence, Los Angeles, CA.
Harrell, S. P., & Bond, M. A. (2006). Listening to diversity stories: Principles for
practice in community research and action. American Journal of Commu-
nity Psychology, 37(3–4), 365–376. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007
/s10464-0 06-9042-7
Harrell, S. P., Coleman, A., & Adams, T. (2014). Towards a positive womanist psy-
chospirituality: Strengths, gifts, and the optimal well-being of women of
African descent. In T. Bryant-Davis, M. A. Asuncion, D. M. Kawahara, &
D. J. Willis (Eds.), Religion and spirituality for diverse w omen: Foundations
for strength and resilience (pp. 49–70). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Harrell, S. P., & Gallardo, M. (2008). Sociopolitical and community dynamics in
the development of a multicultural worldview. In J. A. Asamen, G. Berry, &
M. Ellis (Eds.), Child development, multiculturalism, and the media
(pp. 113–128). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Haslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 10(3), 252–264. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1207
/s15327957pspr1003_4
Haslam, C., Jetten, J., & Haslam, S. A. (2012). Advancing the social cure: Implica-
tions for theory, practice and policy. In J. Jetten, C. Haslam, & S. A. Haslam
(Eds.), The social cure: Identity, health and well-being (pp. 319–343). Lon-
don: Taylor & Francis. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4324/97802038
13195
Henderson, D. X., DeCuir-Gunby, J., & Gill, V. (2016). It r eally takes a village: A
socio-ecological model of resilience for prevention among economically
disadvantaged ethnic minority youth. Journal of Primary Prevention, 37(5),
469–485. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-016-0446-3
Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010). Social relationships and mor-
tality risk: A meta-a nalytic review. PLoS Medicine, 7(7), 1–20. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316
Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative
model of subgroup relations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(2),
143–156.
Hornsey, M. J., & Jetten, J. (2004). The individual within the group: Balancing the
need to belong with the need to be different. Personality and Social Psychol
ogy Review, 8(3), 220–247. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327
957pspr0803
Huddy, L. (2004). Contrasting theoretical approaches to intergroup relations. Politi
cal Psychology, 25(6), 947–967. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j
.1467-9221.2004.0 0404.x
Hudson, K. D. (2015). T oward a conceptual framework for understanding commu-
nity belonging and well-being: Insights from a queer-mixed perspective.
Journal of Community Practice, 23(1), 27–50. Retrieved from https://doi.org
/10.1080/10705422.2014.986595
Itzhaky, H., Zanbar, L., Levy, D., & Schwartz, C. (2015). The contribution of per-
sonal and community resources to well-being and sense of belonging to the
community among community activists. British Journal of Social Work,
45(6), 1678–1698. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bct176
Jetten, J., Haslam, S. A., & Haslam, C. (2012). The case for a social identity analysis
of health and well-being. In J. Jetten, C. Haslam, & S. Alexander Haslam
(Eds.), The social cure: Identity, health and well-being. (pp. 3–19). London:
Taylor & Francis.
Jonas, K. J., & Mummendey, A. (2008). Positive intergroup relations: From reduced
outgroup rejection to outgroup support. In U. Wagner, L. R. Tropp, G. Fin-
chilescu, & C. Tredoux (Eds.), Improving intergroup relations: Building on
the legacy of Thomas F. Pettigrew (pp. 210–224). New York: Blackwell.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444303117.ch14
Jordan, J. (2000). The role of mutual empathy in Relational-Cultural Therapy. In Ses-
sion: Psychotherapy in Practice, 56(8), 1005–1016.
Kang, Y., Gray, J. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (2014). The nondiscriminating heart: Loving-
kindness meditation training decreases implicit intergroup bias. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 143(3), 1306–1313. Retrieved from https://doi.org
/10.1037/a0034150
Khuri, M. L. (2004). Working with emotion in educational intergroup dialogue.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28(6), 595–612. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.01.012
Kim, H. S., Sherman, D. K., & Taylor, S. E. (2008). Culture and social support.
American Psychologist, 63(6), 518–526. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.1037/0 003-066X
King Center. (n.d.). The King philosophy. Retrieved February 21, 2017, from http://
www.thekingcenter.org/k ing-philosophy
King, M. L., Jr. (1968). The role of the behavioral scientist in the civil rights move-
ment. American Psychologist, 209(23), 180–186. Retrieved from https://doi.
org/10.1037/h0025715
Kloos, B., Hill, J., Thomas, E., Wandersman, A., Elias, M., Dalton, J. (2011). Com-
munity psychology: Linking individuals and communities (3rd ed.). New
York: Wadsworth.
Knoop, H. H., & Delle Fave, A. (Eds.). (2013). Well-being and cultures: Perspectives
from positive psychology. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Lambert, N. M., Fincham, F. D., Gwinn, A. M., & Ajayi, C.A. (2011). Positive rela-
tionship science: A new frontier for positive psychology? In K. M. Sheldon,
T. Kashdan, & R. Steger (Eds.), Designing positive psychology: Taking stock
and moving forward (pp. 280–292). New York: Oxford University Press.
Lee, S. J., Kim, Y., & Phillips, R. (2015). Community well-being and community
development. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Retrieved from https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-319-12421-6 _11
Lemmer, G., & Wagner, U. (2015). Can we r eally reduce ethnic prejudice outside
the lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions. Euro
pean Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 152–168. Retrieved from https://
doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2079
Linley, P. A., Bhaduri, A., Sen Sharma, D., & Govindji, R. (2011). Strengthening
underprivileged communities: Strengths-based approaches as force for pos-
itive social change in community development. In R. Biswas-Diener (Ed.),
Positive psychology as social change (pp. 141–156). Dordrecht, Netherlands:
Springer. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9938-9
Lomas, T., & Ivtzan, I. (2016). Second wave positive psychology: Exploring the
positive-negative dialectics of wellbeing. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17(4),
1753–1768. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-015-9668-y
Lopez, S. J., & Magyar-Moe, J. L. (2006). A positive psychology that m atters. The
Counseling Psychologist, 34(2), 323–330. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.1177/0 011000005284392
Lopez, S. J., Prosser, E. C., Edwards, L. M., Magyar-Moe, J. L., Neufeld, J. E., & Ras-
mussen, H. N. (2002). Putting positive psychology in a multicultural con-
text. In C. R. Snyder & S. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology
Lueke, A., & Gibson, B. (2014). Mindfulness meditation reduces implicit age and
race bias: The role of reduced automaticity of responding. Social Psychologi-
cal and Personality Science, 6(3), 284–291. Retrieved from https://doi.org
/10.1177/1948550614559651
Marujo, H. A., & Neto, L. M. (Eds.). (2014). Positive communities and nations: Col-
lective, qualitative, and cultural-sensitive processes in positive psychology.
New York: Springer.
Maton, K. I. (2008). Empowering community settings: Agents of individual devel-
opment, community betterment, and positive social change. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 41(1–2), 4–21. Retrieved from https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10464-0 07-9148-6
Matthews, C. R., Pepper, S., & Lorah, P. (2009). Fostering a healthy climate for
diversity. In M. E. Kenny, A. M. Horne, P. Orpinas, & L. W. Reese (Eds.),
Realizing social justice: The challenge of preventive interventions (pp. 165–
184). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
McNulty, J. K., & Fincham, F. D. (2012). Beyond positive psychology? Toward a con-
textual view of psychological processes and well-being. American Psychol-
ogist, 67(2), 101–110. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024572
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homoph-
ily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(2001), 415–444.
Retrieved from http://w ww.jstor.org/stable/2678628
Meyer, I. H. (2014). Minority stress and positive psychology: Convergences and
divergences to understanding LGBT health. Psychology of Sexual Orienta-
tion and Gender Diversity, 1(4), 348–349. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.1037/sgd0000070
Migacheva, K., Tropp, L., & Crocker, J. (2011). Focusing beyond the self: Goal ori-
entations in intergroup relations. In L. R. Tropp & R. K. Mallett (Eds.), Mov-
ing beyond prejudice reduction: Pathways to positive intergroup relations
(pp. 99–115). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Miller, J. L., & Garran, A. M. (2017). Racism in the United States: Implications for
the helping professions (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
Moane, G. (2010). Sociopolitical development and political activism: Synergies
between feminist and liberation psychology. Psychology of Women Quar-
terly, 34(4), 521–529. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402
.2010.01601.x
Montero, M. (2003). Relatedness as the basis for liberation. International Journal
of Critical Psychology, 9, 61–74.
Montero, M., & Sonn, C. (Eds.). (2009). Psychology of liberation: Theory and appli-
cations. New York: Springer.
Murray, K., & Zautra, A. (2011). Community resilience: Fostering recovery, sustain-
ability, and growth. In M. Ungar (Ed.), The social ecology of resilience: A
handbook of theory and practice (pp. 337–345). New York: Springer.
Nagda, B. R. A. (2006). Breaking barriers, crossing borders, building bridges: Com-
munication processes in intergroup dialogues. Journal of Social Issues,
62(3), 553–576. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- 4560.2006
.0 0473.x
Neto, L. M., & Marujo, H. A. (2014). Positive community psychology and positive
community development: Research and intervention as transformative-
appreciative actions. In H. Á. Marujo & L. M. Neto (Eds.), Positive nations
and communities (pp. 209–230). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Nichol, L. (Ed.). (1996). David Bohm: On dialogue. New York: Routledge.
Oakes, P. (2003). The root of all evil in intergroup relations? Unearthing the cate-
gorization process. In R. Brown & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook
of social psychology: Intergroup processes (pp. 3–21). Malden, MA: Black-
well. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470693421.ch1
Oishi, S., & Graham, J. (2010). Social ecology: Lost and found in psychological sci-
ence. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 356–377. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610374588
Omoto, A. M., & Packard, C. D. (2016). The power of connections: Psychological
sense of community as a predictor of volunteerism. Journal of Social Psy
chology, 156(3), 272–290. doi:10.1080/00224545.2015.1105777
Page-Gould, E., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Tropp, L. R. (2008). With a little help from
my cross-g roup friend: Reducing anxiety in intergroup contexts through
cross-group friendship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5),
1080–1094. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/0 022-3514.95.5.1080
Paluck, E. L., & Green, D. P. (2009). Prejudice reduction: What works? A review and
assessment of research and practice. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 339–
367. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163607
Park, N., Peterson, C., & Ruch, W. (2009). Orientations to happiness and life satis-
faction in twenty-seven nations. Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(4), 273–
279. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760902933690
Pauwels, B. G. (2015). The uneasy—and necessary—role of the negative in positive
psychology. In S. Joseph (Ed.), Positive psychology in practice: Promoting
human flourishing in work, health, education, and everyday life (2nd ed.,
pp. 807–821). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishers.
Pedrotti, J. T. (2013). Culture and identity: Integrating an understanding of cultural
context into a discussion of positive traits. In J. J. Froh & A. C. Parks (Eds.),
Activities for teaching positive psychology: A guide for instructors (pp. 41–44).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1037/14042-0 07
Pedrotti, J. T. (2014). Taking culture into account with positive psychological inter-
ventions. In A. C. Parks & S. M. Schueller (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell
handbook of positive psychological interventions (pp. 403–415). New York:
Wiley. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118315927.ch23
Pedrotti, J. T., & Edwards, L. M. (Eds.). (2014). Perspectives on the intersection of

multiculturalism and positive psychology. New York: Springer.
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A
handbook and classification. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact
theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psy chol ogy, 90(5), 751–783.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/0 022-3514.90.5.751
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce preju-
dice? Meta-a nalytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 38, 922–934. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.504
Pettigrew, T., & Tropp, L. R. (2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup
contact. New York: Psychology Press/Taylor and Francis.
Pettigrew, T. F., Tropp, L. R., Wagner, U., & Christ, O. (2011). Recent advances in
intergroup contact theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,
35(3), 271–280. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.03.0 01
Pittinsky, T. L., Rosenthal, S. A., & Montoya, R. M. (2011). Measuring positive atti-
tudes toward outgroups: Development and validation of the Allophilia
Scale. In L. R. Tropp & R. K. Mallett (Eds.), Moving beyond prejudice reduc-
tion: Pathways to positive intergroup relations (pp. 41–60). Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.1037/12319-0 02
Ponterotto, J. G. (2010). Multicultural personality: An evolving theory of optimal
functioning in culturally heterogeneous societies. The Counseling Psychol-
ogist, 38(5), 714–758. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0 011000 009
359203
Prilleltensky, I. (2008). The role of power in wellness, oppression, and liberation:
The promise of psychopolitical validity. Journal of Community Psychology,
36(2), 116–136. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-011-9448-8
Prilleltensky, I. (2012). Wellness as fairness. American Journal of Community Psy
chology, 49(1–2), 1–21. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-011
-9448-8
Prilleltensky, I., & Fox, D. R. (2007). Psychopolitical literacy for wellness and jus-
tice. Journal of Community Psy chology, 35(6), 793–805. doi:10.1002/
jcop.20179
Rattan, A., & Ambady, N. (2013). Diversity ideologies and intergroup relations: An
examination of colorblindness and multiculturalism. European Journal of
Social Psychology, 43(1), 12–21. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp
.1892
In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the
life well-lived (pp. 129–159). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/10594-0 06
Rice, S. (2008). Living lessons: The psychological strengths of Martin Luther
King, Jr. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.). Positive psychology: Exploring the best in
people: Vol. 1. Discovering human strengths (pp. 151–166). Westport, CN:
Praeger.
Roffey, S. (2011). Introduction to positive relationships: Evidence-based practice

across the world. In S. Roffey (Ed.), Positive relationships: Evidence based
practice across the world (pp. 1–15). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Roos, S. M., Potgieter, J. C., & Temane, M. Q. (2013). Self-efficacy, collective effi-
cacy and the psychological well-being of groups in transition. Journal of Psy
chology in Africa, 23(4), 561–568. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080
/14330237.2013.10820668
Rosenthal, L. (2016). Incorporating intersectionality into psychology: An oppor-
tunity to promote social justice and equity. American Psychologist, 71(6),
474–485. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040323
Saguy, T., Dovidio, J. F., & Pratto, F. (2008). Beyond contact: Intergroup contact in
the context of power relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
34(3), 432–445. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207311200
Sandage, S. J., Hill, P. C., & Vang, H. C. (2003). T oward a multicultural positive psy
chology: Indigenous forgiveness and Hmong culture. The Counseling Psy-
chologist, 31(5), 564–592. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0 01100
0003256350
Schmid, K., & Hewstone, M. (2011). Social identity complexity: Theoretical impli-
cations for the social psychology of intergroup relations. In R. M. Kramer,
G. J. Leonardelli, & R. W. Livingston (Eds.), Social cognition, social identity
and intergroup relations (pp. 77–101). London: Taylor & Francis.
Schoem, D. (2003). Intergroup dialogue for a just and diverse democracy. Sociolog
ical Inquiry, 73(2), 212–227. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/1475
-682X.0 0053
Schueller, S. M. (2009). Promoting wellness: Integrating community and positive
psychology. Journal of Community Psychology, 37(7), 922–937. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20334
Segal, E. (2011). Social empathy: A model built on empathy, contextual understand-
ing, and social responsibility that promotes social justice. Journal of Social
Service Research, 37(3), 266–277. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080
/01488376.2011.564040
Sheldon, K. M. (2009). Providing the scientific backbone for positive psychology: A
multi-level conception of h uman thriving. Psychological Topics, 18(2),
267–284. doi:159.0.019.3
Sheldon, K. M., Fredrickson, B., Rathunde, K., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Haidt, J.
(2000). Akumal manifesto. In K. M. Sheldon, T. Kashdan, & R. Steger
(Eds.), Designing positive psychology: Taking stock and moving forward
Shelton, J. N., & Richeson, J. A. (2015). Interacting across racial lines. In M. Miku-
lincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychol
ogy: Vol. 2. Group processes (pp. 395–422). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Shih, M. (2004). Positive stigma: Examining resilience and empowerment in over-
coming stigma. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science, 591(1), 175–185. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0 0027162
03260099
Singh, A. A. (2013). Transgender youth of color and resilience: Negotiating oppres-

sion and finding support. Sex Roles, 68(11–12), 690–702. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0149-z
Singleton, G. E. (2015). Courageous conversations about race: A field guide for
achieving equity in schools (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Smith, E. (2006). The strength-based counseling model. Counseling Psychologist,
34(1), 13–79. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0 011000005277018
Smith, E. R. (2009). Rediscovering the emotional aspect of prejudice and intergroup
behavior. In U. Wagner, L. R. Tropp, & G. Finchilescu (Eds.), Improving
intergroup relations: Building on the legacy of Thomas F. Pettigrew
(pp. 42–54). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002
/9781444303117.ch4
Smith, T. B., & Silva, L. (2011). Ethnic identity and personal well-being of p eople of
color: A meta-a nalysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58(1), 42–60.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021528
Soto, J. A., Chentsova-Dutton, Y., & Lee, E. A. (2013). The role of cultural fit in the
connection between health and social relationships. In M. L. Newman &
N. A. Roberts (Eds.), Health and social relationships: The good, the bad, and
the complicated. (pp. 189–212). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2001). Improving intergroup relations. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Strier, R. (2011). The construction of university-community partnerships: Entangled
perspectives. Higher Education, 62, 81–97. doi:10.1007/s10734-010-9367-x
Taylor, D. M., & Usborne, E. (2010). When I know who “we” are, I can be “me”: The
primary role of cultural identity clarity for psychological well-being. Trans-
cultural Psychiatry, 47(1), 93–111. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177
/1363461510364569
Townley, G., Kloos, B., Green, E. P., & Franco, M. M. (2011). Reconcilable differ-
ences? Human diversity, cultural relativity, and sense of community. Amer-
ican Journal of Community Psy chology, 47(1), 69–85. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9379-9
Tropp, L. R. (2009). The role of trust in intergroup contact: Its significance and
implications for improving relations between groups. In U. Wagner, L. R.
Tropp, G. Finchilescu, & C. Tredoux (Eds.), Improving intergroup relations:
Building on the legacy of Thomas F. Pettigrew (pp. 91–106). Oxford, UK:
Blackwell. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444303117.ch7
Tropp, L. R., & Mallett, R. K. (2011). Introduction: Charting new pathways to posi-
tive intergroup relations. In L. R. Tropp & R. K. Mallett (Eds.), Moving
beyond prejudice to positive intergroup relations: Pathways to positive inter-
group relations (pp. 3–17). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Uchino, B. N. (2015). Understanding the links between social ties and health: On
building stronger bridges with relationship science. Journal of Social and
Personal Relationships, 30(2), 155–162. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10
.1177/0265407512458659
Ungar, M., Ghazinour, M., & Richter, J. (2013). What is resilience within the social
ecology of h uman development? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychia-
try, 54(4), 348–366. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12025
Unger, R. K. (1998). Positive marginality: Antecedents and consequences. Journal
of Adult Development, 5(3), 163–171. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1023
/A:1023019626469
Vaughan, M., & Rodriguez, E. (2014). LGBT strengths: Incorporating positive psy
chology into theory, research, training, and practice. Psychology of Sexual
Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1(4), 325–334. Retrieved from http://d x.
doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000053
Walker, A. J., & Hirayama, R. (2010). Missing pieces of a positive relationship sci-
ence: Comment on Fincham and Beach. Journal of F amily Theory & Review,
2(1), 36–41. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00035.x
Wang, C. S., Tai, K., Ku, G., & Galinsky, A. D. (2014). Perspective-taking increases
willingness to engage in intergroup contact. PLoS ONE, 9(1). Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0 085681
Wiley, S., & Bikmen, N. (2012). Building solidarity across difference: Social iden-
tity intersectionality, and collective action for social change. In S. Wiley,
G. Philogene, & T.A. Revenson (Eds.), Social categories in everyday experi-
ence (pp. 189–204). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Retrieved from http://d x.doi.org/10.1037/13488-010
Wilkins, A. C., Mollborn, S., & Bo, B. (2014). Constructing difference. In J. D.
McLeod, E. J. Lawler, & M. Schwalbe (Eds.), Handbook of the social psychology
of inequality (pp. 125–154). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9002-4
Wissing, M. P., & Temane, Q. M. (2014). South Africa’s truth and reconciliation
process as applied positive psychology in nation building. In H. Á. Marujo
& L. M. Neto (Eds.), Positive nations and communities: Collective, qualita-
tive and cultural-sensitive processes in positive psychology (pp. 149–158).
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007
/978-94-0 07-6869-7
Wong, P. T. P. (2011). Positive psychology 2.0: T owards a balanced interactive model
of the good life. Canadian Psychology, 52(2), 69–81. Retrieved from https://
doi.org/10.1037/a0022511
Wong, P. T. P. (2013). Cross-cultural positive psychology. In K. Keith (Ed.), Ency-
clopedia of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 1021–1027). Oxford, UK:
Wiley-Blackwell.
Zhang, A., Jetten, J., Iyer, A., & Cui, L. (2013). Difference makes the heart grow
fonder: Perceiving intergroup difference enhances minority groups’ willing-
ness to integrate. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(2), 192–208.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430212450056
Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 581–599. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506983
Zúñiga, X., Nagda, B. A., Chesler, M., & Cytron-Walker, A. (2007). Intergroup dia-
logue in higher education: Meaningful learning about social justice. ASHE
Higher Education Report, 32(4), 1–128.
About the Editors and Contributors
THE EDITORS
MEG A. WARREN, MA, MBA, PhD candidate, is Past-President of the Work
and Organizations Division of the International Positive Psychology Asso-
ciation (IPPA), Editor-in-Chief of the division publication, Positive Work and
Organizations: Research and Practice, Co-Founder and Associate Director
of the Western Positive Psychology Association (WPPA), Chair of the
1st and 2nd WPPA Conferences, and is on the editorial board of the Jour-
nal of Leadership and Organizational Studies. As former Program Direc-
tor and Assistant Professor of Practice at Claremont Graduate University,
she developed the first graduate program in Positive Human Resource
Development. Her research centers on positive work relationships, virtu-
ousness in organizations, and workplace diversity and inclusion. She has
presented at numerous national and international conferences. She is the
lead editor of the volume Scientific Advances in Positive Psychology (2017),
and other recent publications include Taking Positive Psychology to the
Workplace: Positive Organizational Psychology, Positive Organizational
Behavior, and Positive Orga nizational Scholarship (2017), Expanding
Opportunities for Diverse Populations in Positive Psychology: An Examina-
tion of Gender, Race, and Ethnicity (2015), Positive Psychology’s Contribu-
tions for Engaging Differences at Work (2016), Positive Psychology Research
in the Middle East and North Africa (2015), and Positive Institutional
Approaches to Professionalizing the Field of Psychology in the M iddle East
(2016). To learn more, please visit www.megwarren.com.
STEWART I. DONALDSON, PhD, is Professor of Psychology and Com-

munity & Global Health and Director of the Claremont Evaluation Center
at Claremont Graduate University. He is Co-Founder of the first PhD program
in Positive Psychology and leads the Positive Organizational Development
285
286 About the Editors and Contributors
and Positive Orga nizational Psy

chol
ogy Research Labs at Claremont
Graduate University. Professor Donaldson is on the Board of the Interna-
tional Positive Psychology Association (IPPA), Director and Co-Founder
of the Western Positive Psychology Association, was Chair of IPPA’s Third
World Congress on Positive Psychology in Los Angeles (2013), and is on
the editorial board of the International Journal of Applied Positive Psy
chology. His recent publications on positive psychology include Scientific
Advances in Positive Psychology (2017), Happiness, Excellence, and Optimal
Human Functioning Revisited (2015), Expanding Opportunities for Diverse
Populations in Positive Psychology: An Examination of Gender, Race, and
Ethnicity (2015), Taming the Waves and Wild Horses of Positive Organizational
Psychology (2013), Applied Positive Psychology: Improving Everyday Life,
Health, Schools, Work, and Society (2011), and Positive Organizational Psy
chology, Behavior, and Scholarship (2010).
THE CONTRIBUTORS
BIANCA P. ACEVEDO, PhD (BA, NYU; PhD, Stony Brook University), is
a research scientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara’s Neuro-
science Research Institute. She has published several widely recognized
articles on the science of love and sensitivity that have appeared in media
outlets around the globe. She continues to research the biological basis of
romantic love, attachment, sexuality, and empathy in h umans, as well as
examine yogic techniques to enhance relationship and personal wellness.
She was the recipient of the International W oman in Science Award and is
the founder of the Foundation for Healthy Relationships & Lives.
RICHARD E. BOYATZIS, PhD, is Distinguished University Professor in

Departments of Organizational Behavior, Psychology, and Cognitive Science
at Case Western Reserve University, and Adjunct Professor at ESADE. He has
written eight books and more than 200 articles. His books include The Com-
petent Manager, Primal Leadership with Daniel Goleman and Annie McKee,
and Resonant Leadership with McKee. His Massive Open Online Courses
(MOOCs) have over 700,000 enrolled from over 215 countries.
GRETCHEN BRION-M EISELS, PhD, teaches at the Harvard Graduate

School of Education. Her courses focus on supporting positive youth devel-
opment, creating loving educational spaces, and partnering with youth in
educational research and practice. Her research seeks to inform holistic stu-
dent support processes that build on the local knowledge of students and
communities. Gretchen is particularly interested in using Youth Participa-
tory Action Research to investigate and reform student support efforts, as
well as to build positive school climates.
SCOTT I. DONALDSON is a doctoral student in Evaluation and Applied

Research Methods with a co-concentration in Positive Organ izational
Psychology at Claremont Graduate University. He received his BA in Psy
chology from the University of California, Los Angeles, and his MS in
Organizational Psychology from the University of Southern California. His
interests include research on the professionalization of evaluation science
and positive psychological approaches to organizational interventions.
ANNE DOUGLASS, PhD, is Associate Professor and founding Executive

Director at the Institute for Early Education Leadership and Innovation at
the University of Massachusetts Boston. Her work focuses on reimagining
leadership development and quality improvement in early care and educa-
tion research, policy, and practice. She studies and teaches about systems
and policies that support relational and collaborative leadership for positive
change, organizational transformation, and innovation. She has a PhD in
Social Policy from Brandeis University.
RICHARD A. DOWLAT, MA, is a PhD candidate in Social Psychology at

Claremont Graduate University. His research generally focuses on romantic
attraction, particularly online dating, and incorporates a racial perspective.
Prompted by the rise in popularity and use of online dating websites and
services, Richard studies the principles of attraction and f actors that affect
or influence attraction within the online dating paradigm, and attempts to
integrate the United States’ growing racial diversity in his research.
JESSICA FEI is an arts educator and doctoral candidate at the Harvard

Graduate School of Education. Broadly, her research examines how social
structures, culture, and geography shape the educational experiences and
overall well-being of young people in cities. Focused on the interests of mar-
ginalized youth, Jessica explores the intersections of placemaking, social
justice art, and civic education. Her work is informed by her experiences as
an educational practitioner in urban public schools and community-based
organizations.
NELLI FERENCZI, PhD, is a Teaching Fellow in Psychology at Goldsmiths,

University of London (United Kingdom). Dr. Ferenczi completed her PhD in
2015 (Brunel University London, United Kingdom). Dr. Ferenczi has written
or cowritten publications in the fields of identity, biculturalism and close
relationships, and individual differences in social media use.
STANLEY O. GAINES, JR., PhD, is Senior Lecturer in Psychology, Centre

for Culture and Evolution, College of Health and Life Sciences, Brunel
University London (United Kingdom). Dr. Gaines is the author of Cul-
ture, Ethnicity, and Personal Relationship Processes (Routledge, 1997) and
288 About the Editors and Contributors
Personality and Close Relationship Processes; and he has written or cowrit-

ten more than 100 additional publications, primarily in the fields of ethnic
studies and close relationships.
SHELLY P. HARRELL, PhD, is Full Professor at Pepperdine University’s

Graduate School of Education and Psychology. Her scholarly work focuses
on resilience and strengths-based approaches to stress management, socio-
cultural and sociopolitical aspects of stress, and the multidimensional
measurement of well-being. She has served as a consultant to numerous
educational, social service, and health care organizations on issues of cul-
tural diversity and intergroup relations. Dr. Harrell is the 2016 recipient of
the Los Angeles County Psychological Association’s Distinguished Service
to the Profession Award.
JOO YOUNG LEE is a doctoral student in Positive Organizational Psychol

ogy & Evaluation at Claremont Graduate University. She received her BA
in Early Childhood Education from Ewha Woman’s University, MBA from
Yonsei University, and MS in Organizational Dynamics from University of
Pennsylvania. She brings to her research insights from work experiences at
Samsung Electronics, IBM, and Microsoft. Her research interests include
coaching, mentoring, positive adult development, spiritual intelligence,
and conflict management through positive psychological interventions.
HANNAH E. LUCAS, MA, is a doctoral student at Claremont Graduate

University. Her research focuses on optimal relationships across adulthood,
including mentoring relationships, and experiences of social flow in dyads
and groups. Her work with Dr. Mihalyi Csiksentmilhalyi further concep-
tualizes flow in social contexts, and examines phenomena such as love both
in and outside of interpersonal contexts. She currently serves as a faculty
member at California State University, Fullerton, and Mt. San Antonio
College.
CHRISTOPHER J. MRUK, PhD, earned his doctorate at Duquesne Univer-

sity. He is a Professor of Psychology at Bowling Green State University, Ohio,
where he received the University-wide Professorship of Teaching Excel-
lence award along with a number of other recognitions. His books and pub-
lications focus on psychotherapy, self-esteem, and positive psychology. He
is also an Associate Editor of The Humanistic Psychologist, an American
Psychological Association journal. At the time of this writing, his website
is http://w ww.cmruk.org.
VERA ROOS, PhD, is Professor of Psychology at the North-West Univer-

sity, South Africa, and a National Research Foundation-rated scientist
on level C1. She has published and presented widely on topics related to
enabling contexts, relational psychology, intergenerational relations, and the
contributions of older persons. Vera’s theoretical approach, namely, that the
broader social environment informs the dynamic processes in complex sys-
tems, provided the background for the development of the Mmogo-method®,
a projective visual data-collection method and the self-interactional group
theory (SIGT).
TRACY L. SPINRAD, PhD, is Professor of Social and Family Dynamics at

Arizona State University. Her research interests focus on c hildren’s
emotion-related regulation, particularly effortful control. Her work also
considers parenting, and she is particularly interested in understanding
the role that parents play in teaching their young children how to deal with
emotions. Spinrad also has interests in c hildren’s moral development (i.e.,
empathy, prosocial behaviors), physiological markers of reactivity and reg-
ulation, and bidirectional relations between c hildren’s temperament and
parenting.
ZOE E. TAYLOR, PhD, is Assistant Professor of H uman Development and

amily Studies at Purdue University. Her research examines resilience and
F
coping in vulnerable or at-risk youth. Her work addresses individual char-
acteristics that facilitate youth adjustment such as ego-resiliency and self-
regulation, as well as family strengths and protective factors such as quality
relationships and positive parenting behaviors. She is particularly inter-
ested in how youth cope with psychological and physiological stress, the
effects of stress on their mental health and well-being, and what factors
have the potential to buffer youth from stress.
DEEPA VASUDEVAN is a doctoral student at the Harvard Graduate School

of Education. Her research interests include school-community relation-
ships, youth programming, and organizational culture, as framed by issues
of social inequality in the United States. She is currently studying the occu-
pational identities of youth workers as well as the extracurricular experi-
ences of undocumented youth. Prior to graduate school, Deepa worked at
the Out-of-School Time Resource Center in Philadelphia, providing evalu-
ation and capacity-building services for a fter school practitioners.
Index
Note: Page references followed by f refer to figures, t refer to tables.
Academic competence, 132 context and relationships,

Academic motivation, 125 150–151; responsiveness to
Academic success, and effortful specific needs and interests, 155t,
control, 121–122 158–159; social support, 150;
ACTH (adrenocorticotropic hormone), strengths-based approach, 154t,
184 156; structural practices that
Active-constructive response, 21 support positive relationships,
Active listening, 106 162–163t; time and space to build
Adam and Eve, 56 trust, 162t, 165–167; transition to,
Adaptive flexibility, 133 149; undocumented, stress and
Adolescents: addressing institutional trauma of, 150
inequality, 163t, 168–169; building Adultism, 168
positive relationships with, Advance relationship science, 9–24;
145–170; critical dimensions of centrality of, evolutionary basis
positive relationships, 151–153; for, 11–12; conclusion, 23–24;
cultural humility, 154t, 157–158, institutions, 18–20; introduction
168; ego-resiliency, 128, 129, 130, to, 9–11; meaning, 13; pillars of
132; incorporating fun, 163t, positive psychology, 13–20;
167–168; interpersonal practices relationships and well-being,
that support positive relationships, 12; social, emotional, and
153–161, 154–155t; nurturing cognitive development, 149–150;
physical spaces, 162t, 164–165; structural practices that support
partnership-oriented relationships, positive relationships, 161–169,
155t, 159–160; popular portrayals 162–163t; subjective states,
of, 146, 156; positive relationships 13–15; traits, 15–18. See also
with, 5; power of relationships Relationships
with, 146–149; praxis-oriented Affect, positive vs. negative, 195
relationships, 155t, 160–161; Agape, 59–60
reciprocal interactions between Akumal Manifesto, 248, 270
291
292 Index
Allophilia, 257, 267 Canadian Psychology, 231

Allport, Gordon, 256 Caring: bureaucratic organizational
American Psychological Association, form, 102–103; relational
248, 254 bureaucratic hybrid, 103; in
Amygdala, 64 relational bureaucratic
Animal research, 61 organizations, 105–106
Arousal hormone ACTH, 184 Character strengths and virtues,
Ashleymadison.com, 80, 88 262–264
Assimilation, 259, 261 Child resilience, 17
ATLAS.ti, 109 Christinamingle.com, 80
Attachment theory, 66, 242 Citizenship, 263
Attraction: mate criteria, 82–85; Classroom participation, 125
in online dating, 83 Close relational processes, 6,
Authentic happiness theory, 12 231–242
Authenticity, 40 CMC (Computer-mediated
communication), 85–86
“Being human together,” 247–271; Coaching, 18
character strengths and virtues, Cognitive development in adolescents,
262–264; collective well-being 149–150
and social justice, 254–255; Cognitive empathy, 214
contextualized positive Cognitive interdependence, 233
intergroup relations, 267–269; Coherence, 13
cultural and community Collective efficacy, 265
strengths, 264–267; integration Collective resilience, 100
of approaches, 262; intergroup Collective well-being, 254–255
dialogue, 259–262; intergroup Collective-interdependent
relations, 255–257; introduction self-construals, 238, 240
to, 247–249; psychoecocultural Collectivism, 238–239, 241
perspective, 252–254; Communication: facilitation of, 6; and
relationships and positive relational coordination, 97–98
psychology, 249–267; social Communication, facilitation of in
identity, 258–259 older adults, 211–226; conclusion,
Belonging, need for, 248 225–226; context, 216–218,
Beloved community, 255, 260, 270 222–223; data analysis and
Bhagavad Gita, 56 verification, 217–218; effective
Bible, 56 interpersonal styles, 222–223;
Biculturation, 266 examples of impact and relational
Blackpeoplemeet.com, 80 qualities, 218–222; future research
Brain: and pair-bonding, 62–64; and opportunities, 225; implications for
romantic love, 62–67; and social relational well-being, 224–225;
flow, 184 ineffective interpersonal styles,
Bravery, 263 223–224; interactional pattern
Broaden and build theory of emotion, analysis, 218; introduction to,
47–48 211–216; procedures and data
Bureaucratic organizational form, gathering, 216–217; relational
102–103, 104t qualities, 218, 219–222t; subjective
Index 293
impact and relational qualities, Cultural diversity, 6–7, 231–242

222–224 Cultural humility, 154t, 157–158, 168,
Community, and inclusion of in the 265
self, 239–240 Cultural intelligence, 265
Community change, 255–256, Cultural strengths, 264–267
260–262 Cultural values, and inclusion of other
Community college presidents, 202, in the self, 238–239
203 Culturally embedded strengths, 265
Community strengths, 264–267 Curiosity, 263
Compassion, 15–16, 109, 260; shared, CWT (Competence and Worthiness
196, 199t, 200t, 203 Training), 3, 49–51
Competence: academic, 125, 132;
cultural context, 151; definition of, Deep listening, 257
119–120; and self-esteem, 42–43, Default mode network, 195
49–51 Delayed gratification, 126
Competence and Worthiness Training Developmental resiliency, 130–131
(CWT), 3, 49–51 Developmental tools, 4
Computer-mediated communication Devitalized marriages, 64
(CMC), 85–86 Dialogue, intergroup, 259–262
Confirmation, 214 Diener, Edward, 2
Conflict resolution in relational Digital gaming, 184
coordination, 98 Diverse populations, effortful control
Conflict-habituated marriages, 64 and ego-resiliency in, 134
Congruence, 214 Diversity: advantages of, 264; in
Connected Life, adding to positive positive psychology, 231–232,
psychology, 248–249, 255 241–242; strength of, 248
Consciousness-raising, 260 Doctor-patient setting, 202, 203
Contact hypothesis, 256 Dopamine, 61, 66
Contemplative methods, 257 Durable assets, 14
Contextual understanding, 257 Dyadic relationships, 11–12, 18, 20–21
Contextualized positive intergroup
relations, 267–269 Early childhood education: context,
Conventional bureaucratic 94–95; future directions, 110–111;
organizations, 104, 104t importance of, 95; improving
Coordinated professional development parent-teacher partnerships, 95–97;
systems, 99 POS perspectives, 97–98; positive
Corporate social responsibility (CSR), relationships in, 4, 93–112;
204 positive systems change, 108–110;
Courtly love, 57 relational bureaucracy, 101–107;
Creativity, 263 relational coordination, 101–107;
Critical consciousness, 262 systems change and reform, 99;
Critical reflection, 260 trauma-informed practice, 106–107
Cross-group friendship, 257 Early learning standards, 99
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, 10 Ecological model of social support,
CSR (Corporate social responsibility), 151
204 Ecosystem goals, 255
294 Index
Effortful control, 4, 119–134; academic Externalizing problems/symptoms,

success, 132; definition of, 120; 122–123, 129–130
development of, 120–121;
development and benefits of, Face-to-face communication, 87
120–132; diverse populations, Failure, and self-esteem, 40–41
134; vs. ego-resiliency, 126; Fairness, 263
parenting practices, 134; positive Familism, 239
associations with, 121–122; and Family businesses, 201
school adjustment, 122–125; Family engagement, in early childhood
social competence and education, 96
maladjustment, 122–123; Farmersonly.com, 80
teacher-child relationship, 124 Financial services, 201
Ego-resiliency, 4; definition of, 120, Fisher, Helen, 59
125–126; development and benefits Flow, 179–180. See also Group flow;
of, 125–126; diverse populations, Social flow; Team flow
134; vs. effortful control, 126; Focus groups, 169
future directions, 132–134; gender Forgiveness, 17–18, 263
differences, 128, 131–132; high-risk Fredrickson, B. L., 47–48
context, 130–131; importance FTF (traditional face-to-face)
of, 132; indirect relations with relationships, 4
school achievement, 127–130; Fun, incorporating with adolescents,
internalizing and externalizing 163t, 167–168
symptoms, 129–130; interventions, Functional magnetic resonance
133–134; introduction to, 119–120; imaging (fMRI), 62, 63
parenting practices, 134; school
achievement, 126–127; social Games, and social flow, 184
competence and peer relations, Gender differences: ego-resiliency,
128–129 128, 131–132; online dating,
Eharmony.com, 80 84–85
Emotional competence, 4 Genetic testing, 62
Emotional contagion, 196 Globus pallidus, 66
Emotional cycles, 47 Gratitude, 14–15
Emotional development, in Greeks, ancient, 59–60
adolescents, 149–150 Grindr, 80
Emotional distance, 103, 213, 214, 222, Group activities, 166–167
225 Group flow, 180
Emotional empathy, 214 Group identity, 258
Emotions: broaden and build theory, Group norms, 166
47–48; and romantic love, 63–64, Gullah people, 265
66. See also Negative emotions;
Positive emotions Hall, G. Stanley, 146
Empathy, 22–23, 128, 214, 257, 260 Happiness, 2, 40
Empowerment, 266 “Happiness, Excellence, and Optimal
Eros, 59–60 Functioning Revisited” (Donaldson,
Experience, optimal, 181–183 Dollwet, & Rao), 2
Expression of needs, 214 Head Start REDI program, 133
Index 295
High-quality connections (HQCs), 5, Interpersonal styles: effective,

19–20, 186–187 222–223; ineffective, 223–224
Hippocampus, 63, 66 Interruption theory of emotion, 58
HOMMS (historically oppressed, Intersectionality, 259, 265
marginalized, minority-status, and Interventions, and ego-resiliency,
stigmatized) groups, 250, 258–259, 133–134
261, 262, 265, 266 Intimacy: online dating, 86–87;
Honesty, 82–83 romantic love, 58
Honeymoon phase, 46 Intrapersonal change, 255, 256–257
Hope, 263 IPA (Interactional pattern analysis),
Humanistic psychology, 37–40 213–214, 215, 218, 224
Humility, 264
James, William, 40
Ideal selves, 21–22 Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 37
Implicit bias, 248, 257 Journal of Positive Psychology, 2, 39–40
Impulsivity, 130
Independence, 146 King, Martin Luther, Jr., 254, 255, 260,
Independent self-construals, 238 270
Individual empathy, 257 Knowledge workers, 202, 203
Individualism, 239 Korp, Maria, 88
Inequality. See Institutional inequality;
Structural inequality Leader-member exchange (LMX), 194
Infatuation, 59–60 Leadership effectiveness, 200t, 201
Ingroup favoritism, 248 Leisure, and social flow, 183–184
Institutional inequality, 163t, 168–169 Lewin, Kurt, 193
Institutional racism, 164 LGBT community, 265
Institutions, 10, 18–20 Liberation psychology, 260, 261
Insula, 63, 66 Limerence, 58
Integrity, 263 LMX (Leader-member exchange), 194
Intentional change theory, 194, 195f Loneliness, 211, 215
Interactional pattern analysis (IPA), Love: biological/evolutionary basis of,
213–214, 215, 218, 224 55–56, 59; sacred texts on, 56. See
Interdependence theory, 232–233, also Romantic love
242 Love styles theory, 58, 59
Intergroup contact strategies, 256
Intergroup dialogue, 259–262 Mandela, Nelson, 254
Intergroup relations: and cultural and Mania, 58, 59–60
community strengths, 264–267; Marcia, James, 149–150
integration of approaches to, 262; Marital satisfaction, 236–237
overview, 255–257; positive, Marriage: changing norms, 60–61;
267–269 contemporary relation to love, 57;
Internalizing problems/symptoms, historical relation to love, 57;
122–124, 129–130 typologies of, 64–65
International Positive Psychology Maslow, Abraham, 37
Association, 1 Match.com, 78
Interpersonal change, 255, 256–257 Mate criteria, and attraction, 82–85
296 Index
Maternal love, 66 Norm setting with adolescents, 166

Meaning, and relationships, 13 Nucleus accumbens (NAcc), 61
Measurement and reward systems, in
relational coordination, 98 Obsession, 59
Medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), 61 Offline dating, compared to online
Mentoring, 18–19 dating, 87–88
Mentoring dyads, 15 OITs (Optimal intergroup
Mesocorticolimbic dopaminergic transactions), 267–268
pathways, 61 Okcupid.com, 80, 84
Meta-communication, 215, 225 Older adults, facilitation of
Methodological rigor, 38 communication in, 211–226;
Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti conclusion, 225–226; context,
Simoni, 21 216–218, 222–223; data analysis and
Michelangelo phenomenon, 21–22, 55 verification, 217–218; effective
Microcultures, 258 interpersonal styles, 222–223;
Middle managers, 204 examples of impact and relational
Milton, John, 43 qualities, 218–222; future research
Mindfulness, 257 opportunities, 225; implications for
Mother-infant attachment, 11 relational well-being, 224–225;
Motivation, academic, 125 ineffective interpersonal styles,
Multicultural personality, 265 223–224; interactional pattern
Multicultural worldview, 266 analysis, 218; introduction to,
Multiculturalism, 248, 259, 261. See 211–216; procedures and data
also Diversity gathering, 216–217; relational
Multiple case study methodology, qualities, 218, 219–222t; subjective
103–104 impact and relational qualities,
Music, and adolescents, 168 222–224
Mutual empathy, 257 Online dating, 77–85; attraction and
Mutual influence, 232–233 mate criteria, 82–85; compared to
Mutual respect, 97–98 offline dating, 87–88; demographics,
78–79; future research
National Center on Child Care opportunities, 89; gender
Professional Development Systems differences, 84–85; globally, 79–80;
and Workforce Initiatives Center, growth of, 78; matching algorithms,
108 84; outcomes, 85–89; perception of,
Negative change processes, 100 79–80; physical self-presentation,
Negative emotional attractor (NEA): 81–82; platforms and applications,
overview, 194–195, 195f; quality of 80, 84; relational intimacy and
relationships, 196–198 satisfaction, 86–87; relationship
Negative emotions, 48 types, 85–86; risks of, 88–89;
Negative peace, 257 stigma, 78; transition to offline, 86;
Neural activation, 195 types and variety of, 80–81; verbal
Neurobiological markers, 62 self-description, 82
Neuroimaging studies, 62–64, 65–67 Online privacy/security, 88
Neuropeptides, 61 Online romantic relationships. See
Noddings, Nel, 95 Online dating
Index 297
Open-mindedness, 263 Peace psychology, 256–257, 260, 261

Optimal intergroup transactions PEaCE transactional framework,
(OITs), 267–268 252–254, 253f, 267, 270
Organizational citizenship, 200t Pedagogy of collegiality, 153
Organizational mission, 105 Peer relations, 128–129
Other, inclusion of in the self, 233, Perceived partner responsiveness, 21
234–239 Performance, optimal, 181–183
Outgroup liking, 257 Performance outcomes, in relational
Outgroups, 256 coordination, 98
Oxytocin (OT), 61, 66, 184 PERMA model of well-being, 13
Person-environment-and-culture-
Pair-bonding, 59; benefits of, 62; in emergence (PEaCE) metatheory,
humans, 62–64; learning and 252–254, 253f, 267, 270
memory areas of the brain, 63; in Person-in-culture-in-context
mammals, 61 transactions, 252
Parallel process, theory of, 105 Perspective, 263
Parasympathetic nervous system, 195, Perspective giving, 257
196 Perspective taking, 257
Parenting practices: and compassion, Peterson, Chris, 10
16; effortful control and Peterson, Christopher, 1
ego-resiliency, 134 Philia, 60
Parent-teacher partnerships, 101–102; Physical attractiveness, 83–84
barriers to, 96–97; and bureaucratic Physical spaces, nurturing, 162t,
organizational form, 102–103; 164–165
improving, 95–97; insights from, Plato, 56
104–105; and relational bureaucratic Plentyoffish.com, 80
hybrid, 103–104 PNEA Survey, 196, 197–198f, 199t,
Partnership-oriented relationships, 203–205
with adolescents, 155t, 159–160 Positive capitalization, 20–21
Passionate love, 58 Positive emoting, 100
Passionate Love Scale, 58 Positive emotional attractor (PEA),
Passive response condition, 21 5–6; impact of PEA composite in
Passive-congenial marriages, 64 relationships, 203–204; implications
“Pay it forward” effect, 15 for improving relationships,
PEA (Positive emotional attractor): 204–205; introduction to, 193–194;
impact of PEA composite in measuring impact of relationships,
relationships, 203–204; implications 193–205; overview, 194–195, 195f;
for improving relationships, quality of vs. NEA relationships,
204–205; introduction to, 193–194; 196–198; shared compassion and
measuring impact of relationships, positive moods in relationships, 203;
193–205; overview, 194–195, 195f; shared vision in relationships,
quality of vs. NEA relationships, 198–202
196–198; shared compassion and Positive emotions, 14, 47; evolutionary
positive moods in relationships, 203; value, 48; and social flow, 182, 185.
shared vision in relationships, See also Emotions
198–202 Positive empathy, 22–23
298 Index
Positive group identity, 265 psychoecocultural lens, 252–254;

Positive interrelating, 100–101 social identity, 258–259; social
Positive intersectionality, 265 justice and collective well-being,
Positive marginality, 265 254–255
Positive meaning-making, 101 Prairie voles, 61
Positive mentoring, 18–19 Praxis-oriented relationships, with
Positive mood, shared, 196, 199t, 200t, adolescents, 155t, 160–161
203 Prejudice, 257
Positive organizational scholarship Presidential Task Force on Preventing
(POS), 94; connections to early Discrimination and Promoting
education systems change, 100–101; Diversity Report, 248
introduction to, 4; parent-teacher Problem-solving: in relational
partnerships, 97–98 coordination, 98; skills, 215
Positive peace, 257 Professional services, 201
Positive psychology: approaches to, Prosocial behavior: and compassion,
37–40; character strengths and 16; and gratitude, 15; intergroup
virtues, 262–264; close relationship dialogue, 260
processes, 6, 231–242; compared Proximal processes, 150–151
to humanistic psychology, 37–40; Psychological capital (PsyCap), 19
conclusion, 23–24; contributions Psychological empowerment, 262
to relationship research, 20–23; Psychopolitical literacy, 262
cultural diversity, 6–7, 231–242; Purpose, 13
definition of, 1; empirical studies,
1–2; goals of, 9–10; importance of Qualitative techniques, 37–40
relationships, 2; institutions, 18–20; Quality rating and improvement
lack of attention to diversity, systems (QRIS), 99, 108
231–232, 241–242; literature on
children and adolescents, 147–148; Race: inclusion of other in the self,
online romantic relationships, 236–237; preferences in online
77–89; pillars of, 10, 13–20; dating, 84, 85
relational self-esteem and Racial/cultural socialization, 265
well-being, 35–36; relationship Racism, institutional, 164
science, 3; romantic love, 3, 55–67; Reciprocity, 11, 152–153
second-generation, 39; self-esteem Reconciliation, 261–262
and relationships, 47–51; subjective Reflective practice, 257
states, 13–15; traits, 15–18 Reflective supervision, 105–106
Positive relationship science, Rejection sensitivity, 45–46
248–249 Relational bureaucracy, 101–107;
Positive relationships, 1–7; with bureaucratic organizational form,
adolescents, 5; in context of 102–103; hybrid form, 103–106;
diversity, culture, and collective overview, 104t; parent-teacher
well-being, 247–271; in early partnerships, 101–102; quality
childhood education, 4; impact, improvement, 106–107; and
measurement of, 5–6; intergroup trauma-informed practice,
dialogue, 259–262; intergroup 106–107
relations, 255–257, 262; introduction Relational caches, 19
to, 1–2; positive psychology, 3; Relational Climate Survey (RCS), 204
Index 299
Relational competencies, in relational coordination, 97–98; reliability,

coordination, 98 153; and self-esteem, 43–47; and
Relational coordination, 101–107; well-being, 10–11, 12; willingness
bureaucratic organizational form, to initiate, 46. See also Advance
102–103; parent-teacher relationship science
partnerships, 101–102; relational Reliability, 153
bureaucratic hybrid, 103–106 Reputational Effectiveness Survey,
Relational coordination theory, 97–98, 204
100, 103 Residential care facilities, 211–212,
Relational interactions: 215–217. See also Older adults,
complementary, parallel, or facilitation of communication in
symmetrical, 225; context, 214, 225; Resilience, 16–17, 100
impact of, 213 Restorative justice practices, 169
Relational organizational theory, 110 Reward circuits of brain, 63, 66
Relational qualities, 218, 219–222t, RISC (Relational-Interdependent
222–224 Self-Construal) Scale, 237
Relational self-esteem, 3, 50 Romantic love, 55–67; biological basis
Relational well-being, 215–216, of, 61–64; change in over time,
224–225 59–61; compared to Agape, 60;
Relational-Interdependent contemporary relation to marriage,
Self-Construal (RISC) Scale, 237 57; defining, 57–58; as an emotion,
Relational-interdependent 63–64, 66; historical relation to
self-construals, 237–238, 240, 241 marriage, 57; history of views on,
Relationship science, 3 56–57; inclusion of other in the self,
Relationships: centrality of, 11–12; 234–235; introduction to, 55–56; in
contextually and culturally relevant, long-term relationships, 64–67;
152; developmentally appropriate, nature and trajectory of, 57–59;
152; dyadic, 11–12; evolutionary neuroimaging studies, 62–64,
basis for, 11–12; functions of, 65–67; overlap with maternal love,
11; impact of PEA composite, 66; pair-bonding, 61–64; positive
203–204; impact of positive psychology of, 3, 59–61; research
empathy, 23; impact of shared methodologies, 62–64. See also
compassion and positive mood, Love; Online dating
203; impact of shared vision, Romanticism, 239
198–202; implications of PEA for Roosevelt, Franklin D., 9
improving, 204–205; and meaning, Rosenberg, Morris, 41
13; measuring impact of through Rusbult, Caryl, 55
positive emotional attractor,
193–205; modeling, 105; negative Satisfaction, and online dating, 86–87
emotional attractor, 196–198; and School achievement: and effortful
positive emotions, 14; positive control, 126–127; indirect relations
psychology’s research contributions, with ego-resilience, 127–130
20–23; positive therapy, 47–51; School adjustment, and effortful
qualities of as condition for social control, 122–125
flow, 184–186; quality of PEA vs. School readiness gap, 96
NEA relationships, 196–198; Scientific Advances in Positive
reciprocity, 152–153; and relational Psychology (Warren & Donaldson), 2
300 Index
Seating arrangements, 165 Serotonin, 66

Self: inclusion of community in, Sexual intimacy, 47
239–240; inclusion of other in, 233, Shared compassion, 196, 199t, 200t, 203
234–239 Shared control, in early childhood
Self-actualization, 37, 46 education, 96
Self-compassion, 16 Shared goals, 97–98, 183
Self-Construal Scale (SCS), 238 Shared identity, 17
Self-construals: collective- Shared positive mood, 196, 199t, 200t,
interdependent and independent, 203
238; relational-interdependent, Shared Positive Mood scale, 204
237–238 Shared power, 105
Self-determination theory, 158 Shared vision, 196, 198–202, 199t, 200t
Self-disclosure, 46, 87–88 SIGT (Self-interactional group theory),
Self-efficacy, and coaching, 18 225
Self-esteem: affective component, Similarity, preference for, 248
48–49; and competence, 42–43, Social competence: and effortful
49–51; defining, 40–43; control, 122–124; and ego-resiliency,
enhancement programs, 49–50; and 128–129; and peer relations,
failure, 40–41; importance of, 37; 128–129; in school, 4
James on, 40–41; positive therapy, Social development, in adolescents,
47–51; in positive vs. humanistic 149–150
psychology, 38–40; psychology of, Social empathy, 257
36; relational and well-being, 35–36; Social experience, 188
and relationships, 43–47, 49–51; Social flow, 5, 179–189; conclusion,
Rosenberg on, 41; self-expansion 188–189; context, 182–183; current
function, 44–46; and self-regulation, research, 186–188; implications,
44; Tafarodi and Swann on, 42; 188; introduction to, 179–181; and
two-factor approach, 42–43, 48–49; leisure, 183–184; neurobiological
views of, 40–43; and worthiness, effects, 184; optimal performance
41–43, 49–51 and experience, 181–183; and
Self-esteem moments, 48–49, 50 positive emotions, 182, 185; quality
Self-expansion model: of close of relationships as condition for,
relationships, 58–59; conclusion, 184–186; research on, 181; in the
240–242; inclusion of other in the workplace, 183, 186
self, 234–239; and interdependence Social identity, 258–259
theory, 232–233 Social identity microcommunities, 261
Self-expansion motivation, 240–241 Social identity theory, 240
Self-Expansion Questionnaire (SEQ), Social justice: and collective
241 well-being, 254–255; intergroup
Self-fulfilling prophecy, 47 dialogue, 259
Self-interactional group theory (SIGT), Social maladjustment, and effortful
225 control, 122–124
Self-presentation: clarity of, 214; as Social mimicry, 196
interpersonal skill, 223; physical, Social responsibility, 257
81–82; verbal self-description, 82 Social stratification, 248
Self-regulation, 44, 126, 264 Social support, 150, 151
Seligman, Martin, 10, 12 Societal change, 255–256, 260–262
Index 301
Socioeconomic status, and inclusion of Transactional model of development,

other in the self, 236–237 5, 148–149
Spiritualism, 239 Trauma-informed practice, 106–107
States, 10, 13–15 Trust, 162t, 165–167, 257
Stigma, and online dating, 78 Tutu, Desmond, 247
Storge, 58 Type II diabetics, 203
Strengths, character, 262–264;
community, 264–267; cultural, Unconditional acceptance, 214
264–267 Undocumented adolescents, 150
Strengths-based approach: with
adolescents, 146–147, 154t; Values-in-action (VIA) character
developmental tools, 119–120; to strengths and virtues, 262–264
positive relationships with Vasopressin, 61, 66
adolescents, 156 “The Vedas,” 56
Strengths-based counseling model, 265 Ventral tegmental area (VTA), 61, 62,
Structural equation analysis, 236 66
Structural inequalities, 150, 164 Virtues, character, 262–264
Subjective states. See States Vision, shared, 196, 198–202, 199t,
Subjective well-being (SWB). See 200t
Well-being Vital marriages, 64–65
Surveys, 169
Sympathetic nervous system, 195 Wealth, as predictor of happiness, 2
Sympathy, 11 Well-being, 3, 6–7; benefits of, 12; as
“Symposium” (Plato), 56 central aim of education, 148;
Systems change and reform: challenges collective, 254–255; facilitation of
of, 99; connections to POS communication in older adults,
perspectives, 100–101; in early 224–225; impact of positive
childhood education, 99 empathy, 23; psychoecocultural
perspective, 252–254; and relational
Task positive network, 195 self-esteem, 35–36; and
Teacher-child relationship, 124 relationships, 10–11, 12;
Teacher training, 96–97 relationships as key to, 211–212; and
Team-building games, 167 self-esteem, 37
Team flow, 180 “We-stories,” 17
Thematic analysis, 217–218 Workplace: benefit of positive
Theory of “power over,” 103 relationships, 93–94; high-quality
Theory of “power with,” 103 connections (HQCs), 19–20; and
Thoughtful questioning, 106 social flow, 183, 186
Tinder, 80 Workplace flow, 183
Tools of the Mind program, 133 Worthiness, 13, 41–43, 49–51
Total marriages, 65
Traditional face-to-face (FTF) Youth advisory boards, 168–169
relationships, 4 Youth participatory action research
Traits, 10, 15–18 (YPAR) approach, 169

Toward A Positive Psychology of Relationships PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Toward A Positive Psychology of Relationships PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Toward a Positive

Meg A. Warren and Stewart I. Donaldson, Editors

This book is printed on acid-­free paper

Manufactured in the United States of Amer­i­ca

About the Editors and Contributors 285

The task is to learn how to enjoy everyday life without diminishing

Psy­chol­ogy Research Lab. We are especially indebted to the authors of the

“Other ­people ­matter.” I say that in ­every positive psy­chol­ogy lecture

studies using rigorous scientific methods commonly found across the

APPLYING POSITIVE PSY­CHOL­OGY TO

POSITIVE PSY­CHOL­OGY, RELATIONAL SELF-­ESTEEM,

THE POSITIVE PSY­CHOL­OGY OF ROMANTIC LOVE

­ OWARD A POSITIVE PSY­CHOL­OGY OF ONLINE

POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS AT WORK IN

DEVELOPMENTAL TOOLS THAT BUILD SOCIAL AND

BUILDING POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH ADOLESCENTS

SOCIAL FLOW: OPTIMAL EXPERIENCE WITH

MEA­SUR­ING THE IMPACT OF QUALITY OF RELATIONSHIPS

to mea­sure it. Boyatzis posited that f­uture research should continue to

FACILITATING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION

POSITIVE PSY­CHOL­OGY, CLOSE RELATIONSHIP PRO­CESSES,

“BEING H­ UMAN TOGETHER”: POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS IN

collective well-­being. In summary, being ­human together argues that posi-

If civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of h ­ uman

EVOLUTIONARY BASIS FOR THE CENTRALITY

RELATIONSHIPS AND WELL-­BEING

RELATIONSHIPS AND MEANING IN LIFE

RELATIONSHIPS AND THE THREE PILLARS

the contributions of t­ hese positive experiences to improving interpersonal

Bartlett & DeSteno, 2006; Kruse, Chancellor, Ruberton, & Lyubomirsky,

Relationships and Positive Traits

prosocial relationship be­hav­iors, relationship quality, and relationship sta-

need to be understood within the complex dynamics of the relationships.

Relationships and Positive Institutions

One aspect of high-­quality mentoring relationships consists of relational

POSITIVE PSY­CHOL­OGY’S CONTRIBUTIONS

of response, for example, active-­constructive response (i.e., reacting to a

praise for goal pursuits), and at a four-­month follow-up, affirmations of goal

contexts offer a ripe space for cultivation of positive relationships. Fur-

their association with compassion fatigue and burnout in student midwives:

J. Schopler, & C. Insko (Eds.), Intergroup cognition and intergroup be­hav­ior

Ragins, B. R., & Verbos, A. K. (2007). Positive relationships in action: Relational

TWO POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGIES

However, what differentiates the two approaches to positive psy­chol­ogy

THREE VIEWS OF SELF-­ESTEEM

One prime example of the negative consequences of this “feel good”

stable, which is what some of us call “au­then­tic” self-­esteem (Kernis, 2003;

SELF-­ESTEEM AND RELATIONSHIPS

Moreover, it is impor­tant to note that even the strongest critics of self-­

SELF-­ESTEEM, POSITIVE THERAPY, AND RELATIONSHIPS:

of emotion (2002) revealed and substantiated the evolutionary value of

therapy format for clinical populations or as a psychoeducational program

t­ hese pages concerning the connections between self-­esteem, relationships,

Jackson, M. (1984). Self-­esteem and meaning: A life historical investigation. Albany,

A BRIEF HISTORY OF VIEWS ON ROMANTIC LOVE

In earlier times, many cultures tended to view falling in love before

THEORIES ON THE NATURE AND TRAJECTORY

laboratory and self-­report studies. For example, a series of studies showed

­TOWARD A POSITIVE PSY­CHOL­OGY OF ROMANTIC LOVE

THE BIOLOGICAL BASIS OF ROMANTIC LOVE

Other studies using similar experimental paradigms, but examining early-­

CAN LOVE LAST?

Coulter, K., & Malouff, J. M. (2013). Effects of an intervention designed to enhance

This book is printed on acid-free paper

Manufactured in the United States of America

Psychology Research Lab. We are especially indebted to the authors of the

“Other people matter.” I say that in every positive psychology lecture

APPLYING POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY TO

POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, RELATIONAL SELF-ESTEEM,

THE POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY OF ROMANTIC LOVE

OWARD A POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY OF ONLINE

MEASURING THE IMPACT OF QUALITY OF RELATIONSHIPS

to measure it. Boyatzis posited that future research should continue to

POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, CLOSE RELATIONSHIP PROCESSES,

“BEING H UMAN TOGETHER”: POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS IN

collective well-being. In summary, being human together argues that posi-

If civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of h uman

RELATIONSHIPS AND WELL-BEING

the contributions of t hese positive experiences to improving interpersonal

prosocial relationship behaviors, relationship quality, and relationship sta-

One aspect of high-quality mentoring relationships consists of relational

POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY’S CONTRIBUTIONS

of response, for example, active-constructive response (i.e., reacting to a

praise for goal pursuits), and at a four-month follow-up, affirmations of goal

J. Schopler, & C. Insko (Eds.), Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior

However, what differentiates the two approaches to positive psychology

THREE VIEWS OF SELF-ESTEEM

stable, which is what some of us call “authentic” self-esteem (Kernis, 2003;

SELF-ESTEEM AND RELATIONSHIPS

Moreover, it is important to note that even the strongest critics of self-

SELF-ESTEEM, POSITIVE THERAPY, AND RELATIONSHIPS:

t hese pages concerning the connections between self-esteem, relationships,

Jackson, M. (1984). Self-esteem and meaning: A life historical investigation. Albany,

laboratory and self-report studies. For example, a series of studies showed

TOWARD A POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY OF ROMANTIC LOVE

Other studies using similar experimental paradigms, but examining early-

separation, loss, and recovery. Personality and Social Psychology Review,

approximately two-thirds report having gone on a date with someone

present an honest and accurate image due to anticipated face-to-face meet-

factors are a partner’s physical attractiveness, similarity, proximity, and

presumably high-earning occupation (Hitsch et al., 2010). Both men and

in typical face-to-face (FTF) relational activities (e.g., g oing out, observing

FUTURE RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES

workplace relationships have many benefits, ranging from improved orga

Research on Early Childhood Education: Parent-Teacher

FCC [family-centered care] is emphasized in a particu lar medical setting is

Parent-Teacher Partnerships: Connections to POS Perspectives

refers to each organizational members’ respect for one another, regardless

mutual, trusting, respectful, or other high-quality relationship attributes;

The Bureaucratic Organizational Form

Intentionally or unintentionally, organizations structure relationships

Table 6.1 Theorized Pattern of Relational and Conventional Bureaucratic

to enable t hese positive relationships to be spread and sustained through-

Satkowski, C. (2009). The next step in systems-building: Early Childhood Advisory

success; thus, it is imperative to identify factors that contribute to compe-

age as a result of motor and cognitive maturation. There is also significant

externalizing problems across various ages (Eisenberg, Cumberland et al.,

Although the specific meditational processes are rarely tested, t here is

The Development and Benefits of Ego-Resiliency

adapting to changing circumstances, can shift behavior as needed, is

Ego-Resiliency and School Achievement in Childhood

Indirect Relations between Ego-Resiliency

In regard to externalizing behaviors, children with higher levels of ego-

Ego-Resiliency in the Context of High Risk

and self-harm behaviors (Philippe, Laventure, Beaulieu-Pelletier, Lecours, &

Gender Differences in Ego-Resiliency

F UTURE DIRECTIONS: FOSTERING POSITIVE

long-term implications for maintaining ego-resiliency, or for achieving

research on the education of young c hildren (2nd ed., pp. 85–103). Mahwah,

outcomes. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 24(1), 29–44. doi:10.1177/027

symptoms. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30(6), 583–598.

Spear, L. P. (2000). The adolescent brain and age-related behavioral manifestations.

A SHIFT TOWARD THE POSITIVE: THE POWER

collective—and building on t hese strengths to support their well-being and

Through exchanges with the p eople and objects in our environments, we

programs. We conclude with implications for researchers and practition

(Sameroff, 2009). The effects of proximal processes are considered bidirec-

we believe that these dimensions can be actualized differently depending