The study investigated romantic partners' cognitions during conflict discussions to better understand how their thoughts relate to relational satisfaction. Researchers had 71 couples discuss a disagreement through networked computers while talking aloud about their thoughts. The thoughts were coded and analyzed in relation to participants' reported satisfaction. Findings showed dissatisfied partners expressed more angry, negative thoughts, while satisfied partners were more constructive. Both partners focusing on analyzing issues rather than asserting themselves was linked to higher satisfaction. Accessing partners' real-time thoughts provided insights into how satisfied versus dissatisfied couples think and feel about each other during conflict.

1. COUPLES' ONLINE COGNITIONS DURING
CONFLICT: LINKS BETWEEN WHAT PARTNERS
THINK AND THEIR RELATIONAL
SATISFACTION
Written by Anita L. Vangelisti, Ashley v. Middleton, and Diana S. Ebersole
Date published June 2013
Presented by Benjamin Huge

2. WHO IS ANITA L. VANGELISTI?
 Ph.D., University of Texas
 She is interested in interpersonal communication among
family members and between romantic partners.
 Dr. Vangelisti has published articles in journals such as
Communication Monographs, Human Communication
Research, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Personal Relationships, Family Relations, Journal of
Adolescent Research, and Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships.
 She has received the Bernard J. Brommel Award for
Outstanding Scholarship in Family Communication from the
National Communication Association, the New
Contribution Award from the International Society for the
Study of Personal Relationships, and the Franklin H. Knower
Article Award from the National Communication
Association.

3. HAVE YOU EVER ENGAGED IN A CONFLICT WITH
YOUR PARTNER AND FELT DISSATISFIED WITH THE
RESULT?

4. WHAT WAS THE STUDY?
 The study was conducted to investigate romantic partners’ cognitions as
they discussed a topic of conflict in their relationship.
 Past research has shown
1. Very few have investigated participants’ cognitions during conflict.
2. Majority of studies have examined partners’ cognitions in broad terms.
Examples: Relational enhancing or distress maintaining.
3. More of a focus between individuals’ cognitions and their own satisfaction.
Not a partner’s satisfaction.

5. THE LITERATURE: COGNITIONS IN
CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS
 The association between relational satisfaction and partner’s cognition.
 Studies show the differences in those satisfied and dissatisfied
 Satisfied: tend to attribute their partner’s negative behavior to causes that
are external, specific, and unstable (e.g., ‘‘. . . because she had a tough
day’’).
 Dissatisfied: make internal, global, and stable attributions for their partner’s
negative behavior (e.g., ‘‘. . . because he is lazy’’)
 Interdependence theory: The theory suggests not only that people’s
cognitions affect their own satisfaction, but also that individuals’ cognitions
can affect their partner’s satisfaction and vice versa.

6. ASSESSING COGNITIONS IN CLOSE
RELATIONSHIPS
 Most studies have relied on retrospective self-reports or responses to hypothetical
situations
 Reports may be artificially inflated.
 Video-assisted recall to assess the valence or focus of partners’ cognitions
 Problem: Different procedures are needed to capture what partners are thinking
about during the course of interaction
 Video-assisted show..
 Distressed Partners=Negative Cognitions
 Satisfied Partners= Positive Cognitions

7. THE CURRENT STUDY: RATIONAL
Protocol analysis was employed.
It has been used in fields such as reading and mathematics
to explore the cognitive processes that people engage in
as they perform certain tasks.
Researchers using this method instruct participants to work
on a task and ask them to ‘‘talk aloud’’ the thoughts they
have as they work.
Meant to build on existing research using video-assisted
recall.

8. METHOD
 Romantic partners interact with each other over networked computers
and, at the same time, report their cognitions orally.
 71 heterosexual romantic couples. 67 analyzed.
 Participants were 17 to 31 years old. ( M=20.60, median=20.00, SD=2.11)
 71.8% were Caucasian, 15.5% were Hispanic, 12.0% were Asian
American/pacific Islander, 0.7% identified themselves as “other.”
 The length of couples’ relationship ranged from six to 90 months
(M=37.19, median=32.00, SD=16.22).

9. PROCEDURE
 1. Couples go into separate rooms and asked “talk aloud” about what they were
thinking while they conversed with each other.
 2. Given a piece of paper and list 5 issues in areas of disagreement.
 3. Complete 3 questionnaires and 2 computer mediated interactions
 Interactions were on past relationships, money, alcohol.
 Questionnaires on demographics, on protocol procedures, and Marital
Opinion Questionnaire.
 There were 2 coders.

10. TRANSCRIBED DATA
This is just one example.

11. INTERACTION COGNITION CODING
SCHEME
 ICCS is an inductively derived category system designed to describe the
thoughts and feelings that married couples report experiencing during conflict
interactions.
 General Categories are:
 Emotion
 Issue Appraisal
 Person Appraisal
 Process
 Uncodable/Off Topic

12. RESULTS
 Participants whose thoughts focused on Dominating the Floor tended
to be less satisfied with their relationship.
 Relationships in which both individuals’ thoughts were low in assertion
had higher satisfaction
 The more partners’ thoughts focused on the analysis of topics, ideas,
and opinions under discussion, the higher participants’ relationship
satisfaction.
 Higher # of thoughts denying the problem tended to be less satisfied
in the relationship.

13. THEIR FINDINGS
 Majority of thoughts were about self.
 Analyses found dissatisfied tended to express anger, negative,
and critical thoughts. Fits previous research.
 Satisfied partners are constructive or accommodative.
 Couples tended to be more satisfied than they were when
both partners expressed either a high or a low number of such
thoughts.
 Accessing the thoughts and behavior helps show the way a
couple feels about each other.

14. Strengths
 Coding measuring cognition
instead of “relationship
enhancing”
 2 Coders
 Videotaped
 Transcribed
 Protocol Analysis
Weaknesses
 Computer-mediated
interactions are not equivalent
to face-to-face conversations.
 Participants may have withheld
certain thoughts because of
the presence of a researcher.
 Talked about issues may have
been less serious than others.
 Diversity

15. QUESTIONS!