Long-distance Romantic Relationships Research Articles

Relationship Quality, Commitment, and Stability in Long‐Distance Relationships

Using a nationally representative sample (N = 870), the present study compared long-distance romantic relationships to close-proximity romantic relationships in terms of relationship quality, commitment, and stability. Individuals in long-distance relationships generally reported higher levels of relationship quality on a number of relationship quality variables, as well as higher levels of dedication to their relationships and lower levels of feeling trapped (i.e., felt constraint), but were similar to individuals in close-proximity relationships in terms of perceived and material constraints. Although individuals in long-distance relationships perceived a lower likelihood of breaking up with their partner at the initial time point, they were as likely as the individuals in close-proximity relationships to have broken up by the follow-up assessment.

Predictors of satisfaction in geographically close and long-distance relationships.

In this study, the authors examined geographically close (GCRs) and long-distance (LDRs) romantic relationship satisfaction as explained by insecure attachment, self-disclosure, gossip, and idealization. After college student participants (N = 536) completed a Web survey, structural equation modeling (SEM) multigroup analysis revealed that the GCR and LDR models were nonequivalent, as expected. Self-disclosure mediated the insecure attachment-idealization path differently in GCRs and in LDRs. Self-disclosure was positively associated with idealization in GCRs and negatively associated with idealization in LDRs, with the insecure attachment-idealization and the insecure attachment-satisfaction paths negative for both GCRs and LDRs. Furthermore, the insecure attachment-idealization path was stronger than the mediated path, especially for LDRs; the insecure attachment-satisfaction path was stronger than the mediation model for GCRs and LDRs. In other words, the GCR and LDR models differed despite some similarities. For both, with higher insecure (i.e., anxious and avoidant) attachment, the person discloses less to the partner, idealizes the partner less, and is less satisfied with the relationship. Also, people who idealize are more satisfied. In contrast, in LDRs only, with higher insecure attachment, the people tend to gossip more. With higher insecure attachment and with higher self-disclosure, people idealize more in GCRs but idealize less in LDRs. Overall, attachment insecurity explained more idealization and satisfaction in LDRs than in GCRs. Implications are discussed.

Shared everyday decisions and constructive communication: Protective factors in long-distance romantic relationships

This study applied an attachment framework to explore whether shared everyday decisions (SHARED) and constructive communication during conflicts serve as protective factors for relationship quality and stability in a sample of 971 individuals in long-distance relationships (LDRs). The behaviors were found to partially and differentially mediate the association between attachment orientations and relationship outcomes. While SHARED was more strongly linked to commitment than to relationship satisfaction, the reverse was found for constructive communication. Only SHARED was found to predict relationship stability over and above attachment when relationship length was controlled for. The findings suggest that attachment anxiety and avoidance influence relationship quality and stability partly through the two communicative behaviors in LDRs, with especially SHARED emerging as a potent protective factor for positive relationship development in longdistance relationships.

Long‐Distance and Proximal Romantic Relationship Satisfaction: Attachment and Closeness Predictors

Relationship satisfaction was examined in college student long‐distance romantic relationships (LDRRs) and geographically proximal romantic relationships (PRRs). LDRR/PRR attachment style proportions and relationship satisfaction were similar. Multiple regression analyses revealed that low attachment avoidance contributed uniquely to high LDRR satisfaction and that low attachment avoidance, low attachment anxiety, and living apart contributed uniquely to high PRR satisfaction. Relational closeness was not a unique predictor of LDRR or PRR satisfaction.

Relating at a distance: Negotiating being together and being apart in long-distance relationships

Partners in various relational types transition between being together and apart, but these transitions are far from seamless in long-distance relationships (LDRs). In this study, a relational dialectics framework was used to examine long-distance romantic relationships (LDRRs) and explore the contradiction(s) experienced by LDRR partners as they negotiate between togetherness and separation. Twenty heterosexual couples participated in audio-taped ‘couple interviews’ in which they answered a series of questions about the mutual influence of togetherness and separation in their relationships. Results showed that across all 20 couples the interaction states of being together and being apart mutually enable and constrain one another in many ways. Implications for the study of long-distance relating using a relational dialectics approach are presented.

Long-Distance Romantic Relationships: Sex Differences in Adjustment and Breakup

Research has shown that marriage is more beneficial for men than women and that men suffer more distress than women on marital dissolution. To explore the extent to which these findings generalize to nonmarital relationships, college students in long-distance dating relationships were followed over one semester to determine sex differences in adjustment to physical separation and breakup. Breakups increased men's distress but decreased women's. Women adjusted better than men to both physical separation and breakup. Frequency of contact prior to separation did not show a consistent pattern of effects on adjustment. Men, but not women, adjusted better to breakup if they had initiated it. The most distressed subjects were men whose partners initiated the breakup, most likely because they were less prepared for it. Many of the sex differences found here for dating relationships parallel those found in marriage.