The current state of relationship science: A cross-disciplines review of key themes,theories,researchers and journals

Abstract

This article provides a circumscribed descriptive analysis of the current state of research worldwide related to adult romantic relationship processes and their underlying mechanisms. A scoping review was used to gather data. This yielded 15,418 eligible articles from 1,687 different academic journals. From these, we outline key themes and theories arising in the last seven decades and note the most prolific journals and authors. The study of relational wellbeing has focused on overt behaviors such as communication and commitment, on underlying attitudes and motives such as empathy and contempt, and on substrates and circumstances such as neurobiological functioning and life stressors. The results reveal the strong interdisciplinary research underpinnings of the field of relationship science and show up key influences over its expansion. Results are intended to give an overview of key peer reviewed research that has contributed to the development of current scientific knowledge and theory development in this field.

Keywords

relationship science romantic relationships couples literature review marriage relationship theory relationship authors relationship research scoping review

An Update on the State of Relationship Science Research

Recent years have seen an exponential accrual of broad-ranging evidence pointing to the personal and societal benefits of high-quality adult romantic relationship function. This significant body of relationship information portends an exciting time for relationship scientists as multiple academic disciplines converge in a season of mutually beneficial growth. The enormous scale of this research has led to a “critical mass of clinically compelling theory” (Gurman, 2011, p. 281), which, according to couple’s therapy expert Susan Johnson, has instigated a “relationship revolution” (2013, p. 9). In this paper, we investigate and review the mass of research literature underpinning the science of relationships.

As the published research in this field has burgeoned over the last seven decades, a cross-disciplines review of the literature has become an overwhelming task outside of the purview of many relationship researchers and therapists. Consequently, people working in this essential public health and wellbeing domain may be lacking an awareness of the breadth and depth of the knowledge it contains, or the way in which recent studies are reshaping old therapeutic mandates. Previous reviews have been carried out on a smaller scale, including some by relationship science’s eminent researchers: Huston and Levinger (1978), Clark and Reis (1988), Holmes and Boon (1990), Gottman (1998), and Finkel et al. (2017). However, the pace of research output is such in this era that these quickly get surpassed and no longer necessarily represent the current state of knowledge or prioritization of theory in this field. This study takes a broad and sweeping look at relationship science research over the last 70 years with emphasis on the most recent decade of 2010–2020. As such, it encompasses an investigation of relationship science research and draws from this literature base to understand the ascendency of research themes and topics, giving this study a unique hermeneutic entrance point (Heidegger, 2002) and thereby enabling a fresh perspective on the history, context, and current state of this domain.

The proliferating of relationship science data over the past decades—while making available an extraordinary amount of information regarding its common themes, and theories—has also meant that trying to keep up with the latest findings is like “trying to drink from a fire hose” (Kee, 2014, p. 28). As a way of illustrating the significant and exponential growth in romantic relationship science over the last seven decades, a keyword search was made in EBSCO of the syntax: “(romantic OR couple OR marriage) relationship.” The search was limited to books, reports, conference materials, dissertations, and academic journals. This search was further demarcated to ten-year periods since 1920. Figure 1 illustrates this growth.

Figure 1.

Scholarly publications from 1921 to 2020 using the syntax: “(Romantic OR couple OR marriage) relationship.”

As far back as 1953, the proliferation of interdisciplinary scientific research concerned the renowned theorist Ludwig von Bertalanffy who foresaw that with so much data to study, specialization in narrow scientific fields could result. Specialization, while advantageous in many ways, risks a siloing of scientific branches of knowledge, and subsequently a loss of valuable collaboration and sharing of common understanding. In addressing this he wrote: “In so far as the advancement of science is concerned, history shows that interconnection of different fields and problems is a most important basis of progress” (von Bertalanffy, 1953, p. 233). Decades later, in her summary review “The Greening of Relationship Science,” Berscheid (1999) exhorted relationship researchers to work toward coherence among the myriad of scholarly fields involved. More recently, relationship scientists Timothy Loving and Ted Huston wrote of their hopes that relationship science would “overcome the disciplinary isolation that undermines a holistic understanding of relationships” (Loving & Huston, 2012, p. 275).

Despite these valid petitions, the task of negotiating and uniting the flurry of information has become increasingly more difficult simply due to the sheer amount of it. The abundance of new data and the speed at which it is being produced can slow down integration of new theory into existing theory. Melchert (2016, p. 486) wrote in his appraisal of the psychology profession: “So much has been learned about human psychology recently that current explanations of many psychological mechanisms and processes are markedly different from those considered current just a generation ago.” The mass of data relevant to romantic relationship processes continuously needs updating. Yet, this updating is no small task and any serious attempt at evaluating such a broad criterion of data requires both a robust organization of the information and a refining of that information in relation to both existing and arising theories (Reichertz, 2004). This study therefore set about investigating the breadth of research relating to romantic relationship processes across disciplines, and delved into the key themes, theories, journals, and authors, rising to the fore through the decades, with the intention of clarifying the current position of academic relationship science research.

Method

A wide-ranging scoping review was utilized to research this study. Scoping reviews are sweeping in nature and therefore a method suited to exploring the current state of an especially broad research domain such as human relationships (Munn et al., 2018). Arksey & O’Malley’s (2005) scoping review framework and their eligibility criteria were used as a guideline. An extensive search was made of academic literature databases to collate data that related to romantic relationship processes and mechanisms. Data were then edited, reviewed, organized, and analyzed.

Eligibility Criteria

Studies were included if they: a) involved peer reviewed research; and b) illuminated an aspect of the adult romantic relationship processes and their underlying mechanisms. No restrictions were imposed on the language (where translatable to English), or country of origin. Grey literature was excluded on the grounds that their methodological value was difficult to ascertain (Lawrence et al., 2015). No restrictions were placed on year of publication resulting in a date range of 1922–2020; however, issue by issue searches of journals were only made for the decade 2010–2020 due to time limitations and following guidance to prioritize recency and credibility (Ward et al., 2016). Duplicate records were removed.

Identifying Relevant Studies

Relevant studies were identified by searching keywords, key journals, key researchers, and key theories methodically and heuristically.

Keyword Search Method

Keywords (and their truncated variants) describing the population and phenomena of interest were investigated using this initial search syntax: (relationship* OR couple* OR relational OR marital OR marital relation* OR marriage OR close relationships OR romantic OR cohabit* OR partner*) AND (satisfaction OR health OR function* OR conflict OR happiness OR wellbeing). This syntax was applied to electronic databases including EBSCO, OVID, PubMed, PsycINFO, SAGE, Scopus, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Wiley. This search showed up 19,630,389 articles. These were screened for applicability to the research question by reading the titles and those that seemed applicable (related to romantic relationship processes and mechanisms) were retained. This initial search collected 11,218 articles of interest which were all loaded and edited into Endnote—a software tool commonly used for managing academic references (Peters, 2017).

To determine key constructs dominating these articles, 525 key articles pertaining specifically to adult romantic relationship theory were added into NVivo (qualitative data analysis software) and a word search was run on them. This showed up additional high use words that had been missed in the original syntax search including emotion*, behavior*, sex*, dyadic, satisfaction, divorce, dissolution, separation, interaction, interpersonal, couple*, communication, commitment, personality, neuroscience, physiolog*, husband, wife, wives, coping, stress*, motivation, neuroticism, values, and cultur*. Further searches were carried out using these words until saturation occurred. At the end of this stage of research, with repeated investigation of these topics, 15,403 additional articles had been collected into the Endnote database. Every abstract was read through and used to inform thematic categories. Each article took approximately 15 minutes to search out, download, clean, read, and assess. Extrapolated out this meant more than two full-time years of data collection by the primary author, while simultaneously staying up to date on new publications.

Themes were determined by the wording of the title and abstracts of each article. Some articles were grouped into more than one theme where the overlap was obvious. For example, the article titled “Too close for comfort? Adult attachment and cuddling in romantic and parent–child relationships” (Chopik et al., 2014) was grouped under both “attachment style” and “sex and affection.”

Journal Search

The 15,403 articles originated from a total of 1,687 different journals. These journals were tabled and those from which more than 10 articles had already been gleaned were trawled extensively, issue by issue, from 2010 to 2020. Relevant articles missed in the keyword search were thus garnered. A total of 219 journals were investigated in this manner. An additional 3,112 articles were thus added to the Endnote database.

Researcher Search

Following this, an investigation was made of the work of influential relationship researchers. In Endnote, more than 6,000 individual authors were searched and those who had contributed more than 10 articles as the lead author were identified and added to an excel file. A total of 504 authors were thus investigated. At this point, to clarify the most significant contributors specifically in the area of relationship processes, the data were coded into five groupings. Group 5 included articles deemed most relevant to the study of romantic relationship processes and mechanisms (N = 689). Group 1 included articles deemed least relevant, or having no relevance to the research question, or lacking peer review or sound methodology (N = 6,113). The first authors of studies coded into Group 5 were further searched. As a result of these searches, an additional 2,523 articles were added to the Endnote database.

Theory Search

Finally, an investigation was made of relevant, noteworthy, and influential models and theories. Seminal theory identification occurred through reading the article abstracts of those articles coded into Group 5 (most theoretically relevant to the study of romantic relationships). “Theory” was defined in this study as that which logically relates propositions in order to systemize knowledge, explanation, and prediction (Carpiano & Daley, 2006). In the literature, the term theory may also be defined as a conceptual framework or model. Each of these was considered viable for use in the theory search.

A total of 530 relevant theories were identified. An open field (entire PDF article search) Endnote database search was carried out for each of these theories. This showed up the number of articles mentioning the theory at least once in their content throughout the database. Those theories mentioned in more than 300 articles (N = 30 theories) were further searched online. An additional 493 articles were added to the Endnote database as a result of this search, bringing the total number of articles to 21,531. Those coded in Group 1 (N = 6,113) were then excluded due to lack of eligibility bringing the total number of articles used in this study to a final figure of 15,418.

PRISMA Flow Diagram

A brief overview of the scoping review process is outlined in Figure 2. This is a version of the PRISMA Scoping Review Flow Diagram (based on Moher et al., 2009).

Figure 2.

Scoping review flow diagram.

Results

Key Word Search Results

The number of articles assigned to each thematically relevant category are noted in Table 1 in descending order:

Table 1.

Number of articles per theme.

Themes	Number of articles
Personality	2,034
Genetics	1,903
Expectations, perceptions, and appraisals	1,648
Mental health	1,516
Aggression	1,465
Control and power	1,408
Attachment style	1,361
Gender differences	1,239
Empathy	1,145
Culture and societal norms	1,031
Contempt	951
Social support options	923
Capitalization/positive interpersonal disclosure	923
Hormonal/biological/neural substrates and functions	885
Life stressors	736
Character and values (especially self-control, kindness, and humility)	735
Self-esteem and self-compassion	697
Conflict	692
Commitment	683
Communication	675
Neuroticism and negativity	629
Intimacy and vulnerability	623
Mutual responsiveness to expressed need/interdependence	617
Relationship maintenance	598
Sex and affection	594
Personal sense of autonomy and mastery	573
Shared problem solving/cooperation	571
Trust	565
Positivity	519
Addictions	490
Early life experiences and family of origin characteristics	427
Dyadic coping	370
Physical health	360
Financial and practical resources	333
Emotional intelligence	286
Gratitude	241
Forgiveness	229
Life stage	203
Education	197
Religion	197
Criticism	151
Defensiveness	138
Sense of belonging	132
Rejection sensitivity	130
Shared recreation	83
Shared housework	82
Shared humor	77
Listening	72
Previous relationship history	16

Journal Search Results

The 20 most prolific journals supplying the data for this study in descending order are shown in Table 2.

Table 2.

Number of articles per journal.

Journal title	Number of articles
Personality and Individual Differences	685
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships	453
Frontiers in Psychology	431
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology	394
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin	350
Journal of Marriage and Family	322
Personal Relationships	310
Journal of Family Psychology	284
Emotion	278
Journal of Personality	278
Journal of Research in Personality	272
Current Opinion in Psychology	256
Social Psychological and Personality Science	200
Journal of Family Issues	189
PLOS One	158
Attachment and Human Development	156
The Family Journal	153
European Journal of Personality	149
Cognition and Emotion	148
The American Journal of Family Therapy	140

These 20 journals comprise just over 1% of the overall journal pool (N = 1,670) in this study and yet provide 42% (N = 6,502) of the utilized research data.

Researcher Search Results

The top 20 contributing authors of research articles of relevance to this study are presented in Table 3 in descending order, along with their key research interests. The quantification represents the number of articles found that were deemed relevant to this study and therefore does not necessarily represent the number of actual publications of each author.

Table 3.

Number of articles per author.

Author name	Research topics	Number of articles
Phillip Shaver	Resolving conflict and enhancing relationship satisfaction	130
John Gottman	Communication patterns and relationship trajectories	118
Peter Kuppens	Individual differences and emotion appraisal	105
Guy Bodenmann	Dyadic coping and relationship distress	100
Nickola Overall	Overcoming emotional and attachment related relationship difficulties	91
Jeffry Simpson	Interpersonal processes in close relationships	90
Thomas Bradbury	The development and maintenance of close relationships	86
Mario Mikulincer	Attachment and emotion regulation	83
Emily Impett	Approach-avoidance motivation in close relationships	79
Harry Reis	Psychological processes, including responsiveness, that affect the course of close relationships	70
Bert Uchino	Social support and health outcomes	69
Benjamin Karney	Attachment and relationship processes	68
Frank Fincham	Forgiveness processes and impacts	67
Timothy Smith	The impact of personality on social and health outcomes	65
Galena Rhoades	Romantic relationship development and maintenance	63
Eli Finkel	Interpersonal attraction, conflict resolution and goal achievement in relationships	62
Scott Stanley	Commitment in romantic relationships	59
Margaret Clark	Emotion expression and regulation in relationships	57
Howard Markman	Relationship education	57
James Gross	Emotion regulation	56

Together, these 20 researchers provide 10% of the utilized research in this study while representing only 4% of the authors. Of note, of the 20 most prolific relationship science authors found, only four are women. Most researchers (75%) are based in the United States, with one (Peter Kuppens) from Belgium, one (Guy Bodenmann) from Switzerland, one (Nickola Overall) from New Zealand, one (Mario Mikulincer) from Israel, and one (Emily Impett) from Canada. The populations of research are similarly from predominantly first world nations grounded in historic European ideals of marriage and family structure.

Theory Search Results

The prominent 25 theories as mentioned in the most articles, in descending order, are detailed in Table 4.

Table 4.

Number of articles per theory.

Theory	Seminal Author/s	Number of articles
Attachment theory (including adult attachment theory)	Ainsworth et al. (1979); Bowlby (1958); Crittenden (1981); Hazan and Shaver (1987)	2,602
Big five personality model	McCrae and Costa (2008); Tupes and Christal (1961)	1,786
Mindfulness theory	Kabat-Zinn (2003)	1,653
Emotional intelligence theory	Salovey and Mayer (1990)	1,099
Theory of mind	Baron-Cohen (1991)	1,064
Appraisal/attribution theories	e.g. Arnold (1960); Fincham et al. (1987); Frijda (1993); Heider (1958); Jones and Davis (1965); Kelley (1967); Roseman (1996); Scherer (2001); Smith and Kirby (2000); Weiner (1985)	1,053
General systems and biopsychosocial theories	Burman and Margolin (1992); Engel (1977); Kiecolt-Glaser and Newton (2001); Miller et al. (2011); Slatcher and Selcuk (2017); Uchino (2009); e.g. von Bertalanffy (1967)	888
Emotionally focused theory	Greenberg and Johnson (1988); Johnson and Greenberg (1987)	667
Bowen/transgenerational theory/family systems theory	Bowen (1978)	651
Demand-withdraw theory	Christensen and Heavey (1990)	585
Investment model	Rusbult (1983); Rusbult et al. (1991)	543
Dyadic coping theory and stress theories	e.g. Bodenmann (1997); Karney et al. (2005); Lazarus and Folkman (1984); McCubbin and Patterson (1983); O'Brien and DeLongis (1996)	541
Self-determination theory (SDT)	Deci and Ryan (2015)	535
Regulatory focus theory/approach-avoidance theory	Higgins (1997)	506
Evolutionary theory	Buss and Schmitt (1993); Darwin (1859); Hamilton (1964); James (1890); McDougall (1908)	503
Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs)	Felitti et al. (1998)	473
Parenting styles theory	Baumrind (1966)	458
Interdependence theory	Lewin (1948); Thibaut and Kelley (1959)	446
Gene-environment models	e.g. Depue and Morrone-Strupinsky (2005)	444
Assortative mating theory	Mare (1991)	414
Implicit theories	e.g. Dweck (1975); Knee (1998); McClelland et al. (1989)	395
Perceived partner responsiveness (PPR)	Lemay et al. (2007)	395
Social learning theory	e.g. Bandura (1963); Rotter (1954)	389
Social exchange theory/exchange theory	e.g. Blau (1964); Emerson (1976); Homans (1961); Levinger (1965); Rusbult and Van Lange (2003); Thibaut and Kelley (1959)	373

Other commonly used theories specific to romantic relationships included: The actor–partner interdependence model (APIM) (Kashy & Kenny, 1999); Love styles (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1986); Interpersonal circumplex theory (IPC) (Leary, 1957; Wiggins & Trobst, 1997); Sociometer theory (SMT) (Kirkpatrick & Ellis, 2001; Leary & Downs, 1995); Reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST) (Gray, 1973); Self-expansion model (Aron & Aron, 1996); Triangular theory of love (Sternberg, 1986); Social baseline theory (SBT) (Beckes & Coan, 2011); Relational competence theory (L'Abate, 2010); Relational turbulence model (Solomon & Knobloch, 2004); The family stress model (Conger et al., 2010); The sound marital house (Gottman & Silver, 1999); Relationship self-regulation theory (RSR) (Halford et al., 1994); Risk regulation model (Murray et al., 2006); Affection exchange theory (AET) (Floyd, 1997); Convoy model (Levitt, 2005); and The circumplex model of marital and family systems (Olson, 1989).

The most recent theories are also interesting to note. These are generally built upon the wealth of older theories and give an indication of their cumulative impact. Emerging theories and models include: Hierarchical model for interpersonal verbal communication (Jiang et al., 2021); The emotional bookkeeping hypothesis (Schino & Aureli, 2021); Reciprocal impact of relational conflict on physiological resilience (Kiecolt-Glaser et al., 2021); Happy, healthy, safe relationships (HHSR) continuum (C. Murray, Ross et al., 2020); The quadruple theory (Tobore, 2020); Culturally based romantic relationship (CBR2) model (Fonseca et al., 2020); Love as caring maturity model (Hedayati, 2020); Microbial effects on social behavior (Sarkar et al., 2020); Model of the social-safety system (S. Murray, Lamarche et al., 2020); and A gene-environment model (Paris, 2020).

Discussion

This study sought to investigate and analyze the current state of research worldwide related to adult romantic relationship processes. An initial search showed more than a 600-fold increase in romantic relationship related research papers being published over the last 70 years. A scoping review was used to gather data. The results of this scoping review yielded 15,418 eligible articles which were encoded into Endnote. The articles originated from 1,687 different academic journals indicating the breadth of interest in human relationships across diverse fields of science. Of these journals, 219 were extensively searched for the decade 2011–2021.

Themes were drawn from each article’s title and abstract. These themes included: Personality, genetics, expectations, mental health, aggression and attachment, gender differences, cognitions and beliefs, empathy, societal expectations, social support options and life stressors, control and power, capitalization, conflict, communication, intimacy, and vulnerability, taking influence and interdependence, relationship maintenance, and sex and affection. These lined up with the dominant pre-existing theories noted in the research, of which those most commonly referred to were: Attachment theory (including adult attachment theory); Big Five personality model (personality theory); Mindfulness; Emotional intelligence; Theory of mind; Appraisal and attribution theories; Biopsychosocial and systems theories; Emotionally Focused Theory; Bowenian theory; Demand-withdraw theory; The Investment Model; Dyadic coping and stress theories; Self-Determination Theory; Regulatory Focus Theory; Evolutionary theory; Adverse Childhood Experiences; Parenting styles; Interdependence Theory; Gene-environment models; Assortative Mating Theory; Implicit theories; Perceived Partner Responsiveness Theory; Social Learning Theory; and Social exchange theories.

The dominant publishing themes of the most prolific relationship science related journals include: Understanding the bio-social nature of human being and human relating; relationships between human social, psychological, and behavioral features and bodily processes; individual differences in personality and the factors stimulating these differences; cognition and emotion and their structure and regulation; promotion of healthy relationship processes and mending of dysfunctional ones; family relationship networks and larger systems; and family therapy.

The main topics and themes investigated by the most prolific relationship researchers included: Close relationships and interpersonal processes; resolving conflict and enhancing relationship success; communication patterns in relationships; relationship trajectories; psychological processes that affect the course and conduct of close relationships; theories of emotion appraisal and individual differences; emotional regulation; dyadic coping and stress; prediction of divorce and relationship distress; attachment; social support; approach-avoidance motivation in close relationships; goal achievement in relationships; relationship perceptions and appraisals; humor; personal relationships and forgiveness; interpersonal attraction; romantic relationship development and functioning; personality and social risk factors; commitment in romantic relationships; affective neuroscience; Emotion Focused therapy (EFT); Integrative Behavioral Couple Therapy (IBCT); the demand/withdraw pattern; relationship education; cross-cultural and lifespan factors in relationships; and sexual satisfaction. It is clear from this broad array of key themes and theories that across the decades researchers in relationship science have traversed multiple disciplines.

Considerations and Limitations

The results of this study are intended to give an overview of key peer reviewed research that has contributed to the development of current scientific knowledge in this field. It places relevance on article output rather than more commonly used determinants such as citation count or methodological reliability and validity. This alternate method of considering relevance provides a new perspective on the research journey of the field of relationship science. Nonetheless there will be articles missed and additionally articles unnecessarily gathered due to the vast extent of the available literature. Theory and theme names have sometimes been altered over the decades leading to under represention in the word searches therefore skewing the results. Additionally—as some articles were pre-1985, their PDFs were not searchable by Endnote, consequently reducing the identification of these terms. The results are therefore presented not as a definitive answer but more as a discourse that helps reduce rather than eliminate uncertainty regarding the current state of the research underlying relationship science in the current era.

Time changes research ethos and correspondingly theories evolve and transform. Concepts of interest and relevance rise and fall in and out of favor. In this study, only key journals over the past decade were searched by edition. As a result, articles from earlier decades will inevitably have been missed and this will have skewed the results in favor of more recent material and theories. Nonetheless, as this study covers a period of 70 yearsthose theories developed earlier in the growth of relationship science will have much greater length of exposure in the collective research than those published only in the last decade. The older theories and models have had more opportunity to be read, and utilized, and therefore integrated into research processes and included in more recent publications. While older theories tend to therefore represent those most populous in the literature, it is prudent to note that this does not necessarily mean they are theories that are most helpful to the understanding of romantic relationship processes or those most utilized by current therapeutic practitioners. However, the fact that older theories have not only endured but have also continued to be of use to researchers is an indication of their relevance, validity, and reliability (Fesmire, 2014). On the flip side, their continued use could also be an artifact of researchers failing to keep up to date with the overwhelming amount of new research and any changes that these might suggest.

This overview has highlighted a culture and gender bias in the research. The majority of journals publishing romantic relationship research are based in the United States of America, and the few that are from other nations are predominantly based in western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) nations, which comprise only about 12% of the world’s population (Henrich et al., 2010). Approaching research from a westernized mindset can bias the methodology used as well as the results garnered, given that the populations being studied represent a particular cultural paradigm. Although many relationship science theories have been shown to be replicable this is an area of research needed to advance the robustness of relationship science findings (Cronbach et al., 1972; Shavelson et al., 1989).

In a similar vein, the majority of authors were men with women vastly under-represented. While a recent study has shown that women are approaching gender parity in psychological research contribution (46.4% of APA authorships (Gonzalez-Alvarez & Sos-Pena, 2020)), the accumulative record is still skewed in favor of male researchers. Many of the studies in this collation note gender differences in men and women’s approaches to relationship processes. Therefore, we can also expect that there will be differences in the way men and women approach researching relationship processes. In this study, there was an analogous potential for a gender bias in the coding of key topics, both in regard to the authors’ bias and the bias of the literature from which codes were drawn from.

Looking Forward

This study places relevance on productivity across disciplines. As such, it provides a unique perspective on the research journey of the field of relationship science and the emphases that have directed its growth. This perspective may be helpful for those working in the field who do not have the opportunity to broadly investigate the scientific foundations of their practice. It provides a sweeping general view of the state of the field rather than a granular conceptualization of whether this is the state it should be in. The study is limited by the enormous amount of data available to collect and thematize and the inevitable incompleteness of this process. It nonetheless offers a representation of pertinent relationship science literature—especially that which has been published in the last decade—and alludes to its developmental influences. It offers therapists and researchers an insight into the most likely journal sources and authors relevant to romantic relationship knowledge. In homing in on the most drawn upon theories, it may aid educators in understanding the underlying knowledge base around romantic relationship theory. This may also help clinicians in fulfilling their discipline’s core competency briefs—which often include demonstration of a knowledge of the history, theory, and research literature relating to their area of practice (e.g. New Zealand Psychologists Board, 2018).

This study illuminates strengths in the field of relationship science, including the extensive research regarding the ways in which relationship outcomes are impacted by attachment style, personality, mindfulness, emotional intelligence, theory of mind, and attributions and appraisals. These theoretical concepts stand out as the most relevant, valid, and reliable in this area of relationship science due to their continued and popular use and consequent recurrent testing (Peirce, 1878). Further cross-disciplinary investigation into the key findings of multiple researchers may lead to greater clarity around romantic relationship processes and mechanisms via “structural corroboration” (Eisner, 1998, p. 55). In addition, some recent theories were exposed that may prove fruitful for future avenues of inquiry. Of note, research funders could consider the addition of more female authors/researchers and more authors/researchers studying non-first world populations.

Conclusion

Relationship research is complex due to the broad nature of the phenomena under investigation. Many contextual factors influence our understanding and explication of these phenomena and the theories we formulate around them. This study is a starting point for lessening some of that complexity by providing a grounding in the research context that has brought relationship science to this point in history.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Jennifer A Sharkey

Jacqueline S Feather

Sonja Goedeke

References

Ainsworth

Blehar

Waters

Wall

(1979). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Taylor & Francis Group.

Arksey

O'Malley

(2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616

Arnold

(1960). Emotion and personality. Columbia University Press.

Aron

(1996). Self and self expansion in relationships. In Fletcher

Fitness

(Eds.), Knowledge Structure in Close Relationships: A Social Psychological Approach (pp. 325–344). Erlbaum.

Bandura

(1963). Social learning and personality development. Holt Rinehard and Winston.

Baron-Cohen

(1991). Do people with autism understand what causes emotion?. Child Development, 62, 385–395. https://srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1991.tb01539.x?sid=nlm%3Apubmed

Baumrind

(1966). Effects of Authoritative Parental control on child behavior, 37(4), 887–907.

Beckes

Coan

(2011). Social baseline theory: The role of social proximity in emotion and economy of action. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(12), 976–988. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00400.x

Berscheid

(1999). The greening of relationship science. American Psychologist, 54(4), 260–266. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.4.260

10.

Blau

(1964). Exchange & power in social life. John Wiley & Sons.

11.

Bodenmann

(1997). Dyadic coping: A systemic-transactional view of stress and coping among couples. Revue Européenne d'Études Cliniques et Biologiques, 47(2), 137–140.

12.

Bowen

(1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. Jason Aronson.

13.

Bowlby

(1958). The nature of the child’s tie to his mother. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 39, 350–373.

14.

Burman

Margolin

(1992). Analysis of the association between marital relationships and health problems: An interactional perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 39–63.

15.

Buss

Schmitt

(1993). Sexual Strategies Theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.204

16.

Carpiano

Daley

(2006). A guide and glossary on postpositivist theory building for population health. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60(7), 564–570. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40795092

17.

Chopik

Edelstein

van Anders

Wardecker

Shipman

Samples-Steele

(2014). Too close for comfort? Adult attachment and cuddling in romantic and parent-child relationships [Article]. Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 212–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.05.035

18.

Christensen

Heavey

(1990). Jul)Gender and social structure in the demand/withdraw pattern of marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(1), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.59.1.73

19.

Clark

Reis

(1988). Interpersonal processes in close relationships. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 609–672. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.39.020188.003141

20.

Conger

Martin

(2010). Socioeconomic status, family processes, and individual development. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 685–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17413737.2010.00725.x

21.

Crittenden

(1981). Abusing, neglecting, problematic, and adequate dyads: Differentiating by patterns of interaction. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 27, 1–18.

22.

Cronbach

Gleser

Nanda

Rajaratnam

(1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. Wiley.

23.

Darwin

(1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or, the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. J. Murray 11, 121.

24.

Deci

Ryan

(2015). Self-determination theory. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences 14, 486–491). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.26036-4

25.

Depue

Morrone-Strupinsky

(2005). Jun)A neurobehavioral model of affiliative bonding: Implications for conceptualizing a human trait of affiliation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(3), 313–350. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X05000063

26.

Dweck

(1975). The role of expectations and attributions in the alleviation of learned helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4), 674–685.

27.

Eisner

(1998). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Springer.

28.

Emerson

(1976). The social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 335–362.

29.

Engel

(1977). The need for a new medical model: A challenge for biomedicine. Science, 196(4286), 129–196. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1743658.

30.

Felitti

Anda

Nordenberg

Williamson

Spitz

Edwards

Koss

Marks

(1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14(4), 245–258.

31.

Fesmire

(2014). Dewey. https://ebookcentral-proquest-com-443.web.bisu.edu.cn.

32.

Fincham

Beach

Baucom

(1987). Attribution processes in distressed and nondistressed couples: 4. Self-partner attribution differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(4), 739–748.

33.

Finkel

Simpson

Eastwick

(2017). Jan 3). The psychology of close relationships: Fourteen core principles. Annual Review of Psychology, 68(1), 383–411. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044038

34.

Floyd

(1997). Communicating affection in dyadic relationships: An assessment of behavior and expectancies. Communication Quarterly, 45(1), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379709370045

35.

Fonseca

Koyama

Curran

Butler

(2020). A theoretical model for understanding relationship functioning in intercultural romantic couples. Personal Relationships, 27(4), 760–784. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12349

36.

Frijda

(1993). Moods, emotion episodes, and emotions. In Lewis

Haviland

(Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 381–403). The Guilford Press.

37.

Gonzalez-Alvarez

Sos-Pena

(2020). Women publishing in American psychological association journals: A gender analysis of six decades. Psychological Reports, 123(6), 2441–2458. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294119860257

38.

Gottman

(1998). Psychology and the study of marital processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 169–197. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.169

39.

Gottman

Silver

(1999). The seven principles for making marriage work. Three Rivers Press.

40.

Gray

(1973). Causal models of personality and how to test them. In Royce

(Ed.), Multivariate Analysis and Psychological Theory (pp. 409–463). Academic Press.

41.

Greenberg

Johnson

(1988). Emotionally focused therapy for couples. Guilford Press.

42.

Gurman

(2011). Couple therapy research and the practice of couple therapy: Can we talk?. Family Process, 50(3), 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2011.01360.x

43.

Halford

Sanders

Behrens

(1994). Self-regulation in behavioral couples’ therapy. Behavior Therapy, 25(3), 431–452.

44.

Hamilton

(1964). The genetical evolution of social behaviour. 1. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4

45.

Hazan

Shaver

(1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511–524.

46.

Hedayati

(2020). Love as caring maturity: A criticism of the love triangle theory and presenting a new approach to love in couple’s relationships In 10th International Conference on Humanities, Psychology and Social Sciences. Berlin, Germany. https://www.dpublication.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/856HPS.pdf

47.

Heidegger

(2002). On time and being: A translation. University of Chicago.

48.

Heider

(1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley.

49.

Hendrick

(1986). A theory and method of love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 392–402. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.2.392

50.

Henrich

Heine

Norenzayan

(2010). The weirdest people in the world?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X

51.

Higgins

(1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280

52.

Holmes

Boon

(1990). Developments in the field of close relationships: Creating foundations for intervention strategies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16(1), 23–41.

53.

Homans

(1961). Social behavior: Its elementary forms. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

54.

Huston

Levinger

(1978). Interpersonal attraction and relationships. Annual Review of Psychology, 29, 115–156.

55.

James

(1890). The principles of psychology. Holt.

56.

Jiang

Zheng

(2021 January 18). A hierarchical model for interpersonal verbal communication. Scan, 16(1–2), 246–255. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa151

57.

Johnson

(2013). Love sense: The revolutionary new science of romantic relationships. Little, Brown and Company.

58.

Johnson

Greenberg

(1987). Emotionally focused marital therapy: An overview. special issue: psychotherapy with families. Psychotherapy, 24(3S), 552–560.

59.

Jones

Davis

(1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in social psychology. In Berkowitz

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 219–266). Academic Press.

60.

Kabat-Zinn

(2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bpg016

61.

Karney

Story

Bradbury

(2005). Marriages in context: Interactions between chronic and acute stress among newlyweds. Couples coping with stress: Emerging perspectives on dyadic coping (pp. 13–32). https://doi.org/10.1037/11031-001

62.

Kashy

Kenny

(1999). The analysis of data from dyads and groups. In Reis

Judd

(Eds), Handbook of research methods in social psychology (pp. 451–477). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

63.

Kee

(2014). How to energize scholarship for the digital age: A personal essay from Kevin Kee, associate vice-president (pp. 28–33). Brock University.. https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/how-to-energize-scholarship-for-the-digital-age/ at Affairs(5th April)

64.

Kelley

(1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In Levine

(Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 15, pp. 192v238). University of Nebraska Press.

65.

Kiecolt-Glaser

Newton

(2001). Marriage and health: His and hers. Psychological Bulletin, 127(4), 472–503.

66.

Kiecolt-Glaser

Wilson

Shrout

Madison

Andridge

Peng

Malarkey

Bailey

(2021). The gut reaction to couples' relationship troubles: A route to gut dysbiosis through changes in depressive symptoms. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 125, 105132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2021.105132

67.

Kirkpatrick

Ellis

(2001). An evolutionary-psychological approach to self-esteem: Multiple domains and multiple functions. In Fletcher

Clark

(Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Interpersonal processes (pp. 411–436). Blackwell Publishers.

68.

Knee

(1998). Implicit theories of relationships: assessment and prediction of romantic relationship initiation, coping, and longevity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 360–370.

69.

L'Abate

(2010). Relational competence theory: Research and mental health applications. Springer.

70.

Lawrence

Thomas

Houghton

Weldon

(2015). Collecting the evidence: Improving access to grey literature and data for public policy and practice. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 46(4), 229–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048623.2015.1081712

71.

Lazarus

Folkman

(1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. Springer.

72.

Leary

Downs

(1995). Interpersonal functions of the self-esteem motive: The self-esteem system as a sociometer. In Kernis

(Ed.), Efficacy, Agency, and Self-Esteem (pp. 123–144). Plenum Press.

73.

Leary

(1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality. Ronald Press.

74.

Lemay

Clark

Feeney

(2007). Jan-Feb). Projection of responsiveness to needs and the construction of satisfying communal relationships [Article]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5), 834–853. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.834

75.

Levinger

(1965). Marital cohesiveness and dissolution: An integrative review. Journal of Medicinal Food, 27, 19–28.

76.

Levitt

(2005). Social relations in childhood and adolescence: The convoy model perspective. Human Development, 48(1–2), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.1159/000083214

77.

Lewin

(1948). Resolving social conflicts; selected papers on group dynamics.

78.

Loving

Huston

(2012). Back to the future: Resurrecting and vitalizing the unrealized call for interdisciplinary research on close relationships. In Campbell

Loving

T. J.

Campbell

Loving

T. J.

(Eds.), Interdisciplinary research on close relationships: The case for integration (pp. 273–282). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13486-012

79.

Mare

(1991). Five decades of educational assortative mating. American Sociological Review, 56(1), 15–32. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2095670

80.

McClelland

Koestner

Weinberger

(1989). How do self-attributed and implicit motives differ?. Psychological Review, 96(4), 690–702.

81.

McCrae

Costa

(2008). The Five-Factor Theory of personality. In John

Robins

Pervin

(Eds), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 159–181). New York: Guilford.

82.

McCubbin

Patterson

(1983). The family stress process. Marriage and Family Review, 6(1–2), 7–37. https://doi.org/10.1300/J002v06n01_02

83.

McDougall

(1908). An introduction to social psychology. Methuen.

84.

Melchert

(2016). Leaving behind our preparadigmatic past: Professional psychology as a unified clinical science. American Psychologist, 71(6), 486–496. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040227

85.

Miller

Lachman

Chen

Gruenewald

Karlamangla

Seeman

(2011). Pathways to resilience: Maternal nurturance as a buffer against the effects of childhood poverty on metabolic syndrome at midlife. Psychological Science, 22(12), 1591–1599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611419170

86.

Moher

Liberati

Tetzlaff

Altman

(2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. Open Medicine: A Peer-Reviewed, Independent, Open-Access Journal, 3(3), e123-e130. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13118

87.

Munn

Peters

Stern

Tufanaru

McArthur

Aromataris

(2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

88.

Murray

Ross

Cannon

(2020). The happy, healthy, safe relationships continuum: Conceptualizing a spectrum of relationship quality to guide community-based healthy relationship promotion programming. The Family Journal, 29(1), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480720960416

89.

Murray

Holmes

Collins

(2006). 09/01/Optimizing assurance: The risk regulation system in relationships [Article]. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 641–666. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.641

90.

Murray

Lamarche

Seery

Jung

Griffin

Brinkman

(2020). The social-safety system: Fortifying relationships in the face of the unforeseeable. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21, 111. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000245

91.

New Zealand Psychologists Board (2018). Core competencies for the practice of psychology in Aotearoa New Zealand. www.psychologistsboard.org.nz

92.

O'Brien

DeLongis

(1996). The interactional context of problem-emotion-, and relationship-focused coping: The role of the Big Five personality factors. Journal of Personality, 64(4), 775–813. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb00944.x

93.

Olson

(1989). Circumplex model of family systems VIII: Family assessment and intervention. In Olson

Russell

Sprenkle

(Eds.), Circumplex model: Systemic assessment and treatment of families (pp. 7–50). Routledge.

94.

Paris

(2020). Diagnoses, disorders, and traits. American Psychiatric Publishing.

95.

Peirce

(1878). Illustrations of the logic of science. Popular Science Monthly, 13, 121.

96.

Peters

(2017). Managing and coding references for systematic reviews and scoping reviews in Endnote. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 36(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2017.1259891

97.

Reichertz

(2004). Abduction, deduction and induction in qualitative research. In Flick

(Ed), A Companion to Qualitative Research (pp. 159–165). Sage.

98.

Roseman

(1996). Appraisal determinants of emotions: Constructing a more accurate and comprehensive theory. Cognition and Emotion, 10(3), 241–278.

99.

Rotter

(1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. Prentice-Hall.

100.

Rusbult

(1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(1), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.1.101

101.

Rusbult

Van Lange

(2003). Interdependence, interaction, and relationships. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 351. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145059

102.

Rusbult

Verette

Whitney

Slovic

Lipkus

(1991). Accommodation processes in close relationships: Theory and preliminary empirical evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(1), 53–78.

103.

Salovey

Mayer

(1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 9, 185–211.

104.

Sarkar

Harty

Johnson

Moeller

Carmody

Lehto

Erdman

Dunbar

Burnet

(2020). The role of the microbiome in the neurobiology of social behaviour. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 95(5), 1131–1166. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12603

105.

Scherer

(2001). Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research. Oxford University Press.

106.

Schino

Aureli

(2021). The role of affect in cooperation: How to test the emotional bookkeeping hypothesis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 120, 262–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.11.022

107.

Shavelson

Webb

Rowley

(1989). Generalizability theory. American Psychologist, 44, 922–932.

108.

Slatcher

Selcuk

(2017). A social psychological perspective on the links between close relationships and health. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(1), 16–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416667444

109.

Smith

Kirby

(2000). Consequences require antecedents: Toward a process model of emotion elicitation. In Forgas

(Ed), Feeling and Thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (pp. 83–106). Cambridge University Press.

110.

Solomon

Knobloch

(2004). A model of relational turbulence: The role of intimacy, relational uncertainty, and interference from partners in appraisals of irritations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21(6), 795–816. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407504047838

111.

Sternberg

(1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93, 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.119

112.

Thibaut

Kelley

(1959). The social psychology of groups. Wiley.

113.

Tobore

(2020). Towards a comprehensive theory of love: The quadruple theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00862

114.

Tupes

Christal

(1961). Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. ASD-TR61-97.

115.

Uchino

(2009). What a lifespan approach might tell us about why distinct measures of social support have differential links to physical health. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26(1), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407509105521

116.

von Bertalanffy

(1953). Philosophy of science in scientific education. The Scientific Monthly, 77(5), 233–239. https://www.jstor.org/stable/21168

117.

von Bertalanffy

(1967). General theory of systems: Application to psychology. Social Science Information, 6(6), 125.

118.

Ward

Clack

Haig

(2016). The abductive theory of method: Scientific inquiry and clinical practice [Article]. Behaviour Change, 33(4), 212–231. https://doi.org/10.1017/bec.2017.1

119.

Weiner

(1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–573. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3903815

120.

Wiggins

Trobst

(1997). When is a circumplex an "interpersonal circumplex"? The case of supportive actions. Circumplex models of personality and emotions (pp. 57–80). https://doi.org/10.1037/10261-003