This Article Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Horowitz, L. M. Articles by Henderson, L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Horowitz, L. M. Articles by Henderson, L. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Family Issues Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

How Interpersonal Motives Clarify the Meaning of Interpersonal Behavior: A Revised Circumplex Model

Kelly R. Wilson

Bulent Turan

Pavel Zolotsev

Michael J. Constantino

Lynne Henderson

Department of Psychology, Stanford University

Circumplex models have organized interpersonal behavior along 2 orthogonal dimensions-communion (which emphasizes connection between people) and agency (which emphasizes one person's influence over the other). However, many empirical studies have disconfirmed certain predictions from these models. We therefore revised the model in 4 ways that highlight interpersonal motives. In our revision: (a) the negative pole of communion is indifference, not hostility; (b) a given behavior invites (not evokes) a desired reaction from the partner; (c) the complement of a behavior is a reaction that would satisfy the motive behind that behavior; (d) noncomplementary reactions induce negative affect. If the motive is unclear, the meaning of the behavior is ambiguous. This ambiguity helps explain failures in social support, miscommunications in everyday life, and features of most personality disorders. The model emphasizes measurable individual differences: Reactions that are complementary for one person need not be complementary for another.

Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 10, No. 1, 67-86 (2006)
DOI: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1001_4


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Anderson, D. R. Ames, and S. D. Gosling Punishing Hubris: The Perils of Overestimating One's Status in a Group Pers Soc Psychol Bull, January 1, 2008; 34(1): 90 - 101. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. M. Markey and C. N. Markey Romantic ideals, romantic obtainment, and relationship experiences: The complementarity of interpersonal traits among romantic partners Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, August 1, 2007; 24(4): 517 - 533. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. D. Locke and P. Sadler Self-Efficacy, Values, and Complementarity in Dyadic Interactions: Integrating Interpersonal and Social-Cognitive Theory Pers Soc Psychol Bull, January 1, 2007; 33(1): 94 - 109. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Shechtman and L. M. Horowitz Interpersonal and Noninterpersonal Interactions, Interpersonal Motives, and the Effect of Frustrated Motives Pers Soc Psychol Bull, August 1, 2006; 32(8): 1126 - 1139. [Abstract] [PDF]