This Article Full Text (PDF) 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 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 Google Scholar Articles by Drigotas, S. M. Articles by Rusbult, C. E. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Drigotas, S. M. Articles by Rusbult, C. E. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

On the Peculiarities of Loyalty: A Diary Study of Responses to Dissatisfaction in Everyday Life

Southern Methodist University

Gregory A. Whitney

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Caryl E. Rusbult

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Research on exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect suggests an enigma: Whereas responding to dissatisfying incidents with exit or neglect is generally harmful-and whereas voice is generally beneficial loyalty does not reliably yield favorable consequences. A diary study of dating partners' responses to dissatisfying incidents revealed results consistent with two explanations of the unreliable payoffs of loyalty. First, loyalty is less "visible" than the other responses: Partners exhibited less agreement about the occurrence of loyalty than other responses; individuals reported greater frequencies of loyalty for themselves than for their partners; and there were greater discrepancies between perceived frequencies of voice relative to loyalty for partner than for self: Thus, when an individual behaves loyally, this response frequently remains unnoticed (or is misinterpreted). Second, because acts of loyalty operate in an indirect manner; they frequently produce less extreme outcomes: Although loyalty responses were judged to yield more constructive consequences than exit and neglect, loyalty was judged less constructive than voice.

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. K. Knobloch, D. H. Solomon, and J. A. Theiss The Role of Intimacy in the Production and Perception of Relationship Talk Within Courtship Communication Research, August 1, 2006; 33(4): 211 - 241. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. M. Morry and C. Harasymchuk Perceptions of locus of control and satisfaction in friendships: The impact of problem-solving strategies Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, April 1, 2005; 22(2): 183 - 206. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. F. Spake, S. E. Beatty, B. K. Brockman, and T. N. Crutchfield Consumer Comfort in Service Relationships: Measurement and Importance Journal of Service Research, May 1, 2003; 5(4): 316 - 332. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. O. Gaines, Jr., C. Work, H. Johnson, M. S. P. Youn, and K. Lai Impact of Attachment Style and Self-Monitoring on Individuals' Responses to Accommodative Dilemmas Across Relationship Types Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, December 1, 2000; 17(6): 767 - 789. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. O. Gaines Jr, C. S. Granrose, D. I. Rios, B. F. Garcia, M. S. P. Youn, K. R. Farris, and K. L. Bledsoe Patterns of Attachment and Responses to Accommodative Dilemmas among Interethnic/Interracial Couples Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, April 1, 1999; 16(2): 275 - 285. [Abstract] [PDF]