Adolescent Romantic Relationships - W. Andrew Collins,1 Deborah P. Welsh,2 and Wyndol Furman3 - College of Arts ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
ANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
V I E W
E
R
S
C E
I N
N
A
D V A
Adolescent Romantic
Relationships
W. Andrew Collins,1 Deborah P. Welsh,2
and Wyndol Furman3
1
Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis,
Minnesota 55455-0345; email: wcollins@umn.edu
2
Department of Psychology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996-0900;
email: dwelsh@utk.edu
3
Department of Psychology, University of Denver, Denver, Colorado 80209;
email: wfurman@nova.psych.du.edu
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2009. 60:25.1–25.22 Key Words
The Annual Review of Psychology is online at adolescence, contexts, peers, development
psych.annualreviews.org
This article’s doi: Abstract
10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163459
In this article, we review theoretical and empirical advances in research
Copyright c 2009 by Annual Reviews. on romantic relationships between age 10 and the early twenties. First,
All rights reserved
we describe key themes in this area of research. Next, we briefly char-
0066-4308/09/0110-0001$20.00 acterize the most influential theoretical formulations and distinctive
methodological issues. We then describe research findings regarding
pertinent social and developmental processes. We summarize the ex-
tensive findings on relationships with parents and peers as a context for
romantic relationships. Finally, we characterize the growing evidence
that adolescent romantic relationships are significant for individual ad-
justment and development, and we note promising directions for further
research.
25.1ANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
from the remarkable expansion and refinement
Contents of scientific research on interpersonal relation-
ships (Reis et al. 2000). The scope and vitality
INTRODUCTION
of current research in the area are remarkable.
AND OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.2
Several edited volumes have been published
THEORETICAL AND
(e.g., Crouter & Booth 2006, Florsheim 2003,
METHODOLOGICAL
Furman et al. 1999); research laboratories
CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.3
in North America, South America, Europe,
Theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.3
Australia, and the Middle East pursue research
Methodological Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.5
programs on the nature and processes of adoles-
ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP
cent romantic relationships; and the number of
PROCESSES DURING
journal articles and scientific program slots de-
ADOLESCENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.6
voted to the topic have increased annually since
Involvement in Romantic
2000.
Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.7
The term “romantic relationships” refers
Partner Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.8
to mutually acknowledged ongoing voluntary
Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.8
interactions. Compared to other peer relation-
Relationship Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25.10
ships, romantic ones typically have a distinc-
Cognitive and Emotional
tive intensity, commonly marked by expres-
Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25.11
sions of affection and current or anticipated
Concluding Comment . . . . . . . . . . . . .25.12
sexual behavior. This definition applies to same-
INTERPERSONAL CONTEXTS . . .25.12
gender, as well as mixed-gender, relationships.
Peer Affiliations and Friendships . . . .25.12
The term “romantic experiences” refers to a
Relationships with Parents . . . . . . . . .25.13
larger category of activities and cognitions that
SIGNIFICANCE OF
includes relationships and also varied behav-
ADOLESCENT ROMANTIC
ioral, cognitive, and emotional phenomena that
RELATIONSHIPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25.14
do not involve direct experiences with a ro-
ISSUES AND FUTURE
mantic partner. This category includes fantasies
DIRECTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25.15
and one-sided attractions (“crushes”), as well
as interactions with potential romantic partners
and brief nonromantic sexual encounters (e.g.,
Romantic “hooking up,” or casual involvement in activi-
relationships: INTRODUCTION ties usually thought to take place with roman-
mutually AND OVERVIEW tic partners, from “making out” to intercourse)
acknowledged ongoing
voluntary interactions, Romantic relationships are a hallmark of (B. Brown et al. 1999, Furman & Collins 2008,
commonly marked by adolescence. Only in the past decade, however, Manning et al. 2006). Little research has been
expressions of has scientific interest begun to match the hold devoted to romantic experiences other than ac-
affection and perhaps of this topic on the popular and artistic imag- tual relationships.
current or anticipated
ination. Once regarded as trivial, transitory, or Romantic relationships are more common
sexual behavior
merely artifacts of social dysfunction, adoles- during adolescence than has usually been as-
Romantic
cent romantic relationships increasingly are re- sumed. More than half of U.S. adolescents re-
experiences: varied
behavioral, cognitive, garded as potentially significant relational fac- port having had a special romantic relationship
and emotional tors in individual development and well being in the past 18 months (Carver et al. 2003). The
phenomena with (Collins 2003, Furman & Collins 2008, Furman proportions are even higher with more inclu-
romantic content; may & Shaffer 2003). The intellectual forebears of sive definitions of romantic relationships (e.g.,
or may not include
this contemporary perspective come not only dating, spending time with or going out with
direct experiences with
a romantic partner from the study of adolescent psychology and someone for a month or longer) (Furman &
development (Smetana et al. 2006), but also Hand 2006). Incidence varies, however, across
25.2 Collins · Welsh · FurmanANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
the three commonly recognized subperiods of tic experiences of nonheterosexual youths is in-
adolescence: early adolescence (typically ages creasing, as well.
10–13); middle adolescence (ages 14–17); and In this review, we first briefly describe espe-
“Hooking up”: casual
late adolescence (18 until the early twenties) cially influential theoretical and methodologi- involvement in
(Smetana et al. 2006). For example, 36% of cal considerations in current research. We next activities usually
13-year-olds, 53% of 15-year-olds, and 70% of summarize current knowledge about key fea- thought to take place
17-year-olds report having had a “special” ro- tures of adolescent romantic relationships: the with romantic partners
(e.g., “making out,”
mantic relationship in the previous 18 months. nature, degree, and timing of involvement in
intercourse)
By middle adolescence, most individuals have romantic relationships; the nature and psy-
Relationship quality:
been involved in at least one romantic relation- chological significance of relationship quality;
degree to which
ship (Carver et al. 2003). High school students the contributions of the characteristics of ro- partners manifest
commonly report more frequent interactions mantic partners; salient features of the content intimacy, affection,
with romantic partners than with parents, sib- of these relationships, such as sexual behavior and nurturance
lings, or friends (Laursen & Williams 1997). and partner aggression; and the cognitive and
The percentage of adolescents who report hav- emotional processes associated with romantic
ing a romantic relationship increases during the relationships. For each of these features, we
teenage years (Carver et al. 2003). consider both developmental changes and in-
Research on adolescent romantic relation- dividual differences. We then address the role
ships has increased more in the past decade of relationship networks in adolescent relation-
than in all of the previous century. Before 1999, ships. Finally, we discuss the evidence regard-
the small amount of available information was ing the psychological and developmental signif-
largely descriptive. The primary foci were ado- icance of participating in adolescent romantic
lescents’ perceptions of potential partners and relationships. The review concludes by identi-
the extent of dating activity; interest in the sig- fying especially promising directions for further
nificance for individual development was lim- research.
ited to the association with maladaptation and
negative behavior (see Collins 2003 for a his-
torical perspective). Contemporary researchers THEORETICAL AND
have expanded their purview in several respects. METHODOLOGICAL
First, greater attention has been given to the CONSIDERATIONS
quality of these relationships and their potential
Theories
implications for positive, as well as negative, de-
velopmental outcomes for adolescents. Second, The theories that commonly serve as touch-
research questions have been broadened to en- stones in current research ground romantic
compass the processes associated with involve- relationships in normative social experiences
ment in and qualities of adolescent relationships of childhood and adolescence. They include
(e.g., cognitions and perceptions, emotions, and biosocial perspectives, such as evolutionary the-
intimacy). In both of these first two research ory, more specific formulations emphasizing
trends, researchers also have shifted from al- neuroendocrine functioning, and genetics; eco-
most exclusive reliance on questionnaires to in- logical perspectives; and interpersonal formula-
corporating observational methods, detailed in- tions, such as attachment and interdependence
terviews, and other methods. Third, research theories.
on romantic relationships, like research on ado-
lescents generally, has become more inclusive. Biosocial perspectives. Biosocial perspec-
Researchers now give greater attention to cul- tives emanate largely from evolutionary
tural, racial, and socioeconomic diversity in the psychology and research on neuroendocrine
characteristics and significance of adolescent processes. A common premise is that changes in
romantic relationships. Research on the roman- social relationships that enhance reproductive
www.annualreviews.org • Adolescent Romantic Relationships 25.3ANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
fitness should co-occur with attaining re- ical, social, economic, political, geographical,
productive capability (Weisfeld 1999). This cultural, and institutional and community con-
premise undergirds much of the existing ditions and characteristics that shape proximal
research on the implications of pubertal experiences (Larson & Wilson 2004). Among
development for the changing distribution of the most frequently studied contexts of ado-
adolescents with adults and peers, especially lescent romantic relationships are networks of
other-sex peers. Research findings from studies families and peers, ethnic/cultural contexts, re-
of both human and nonhuman adolescent ligious institutions, and the mass media (e.g.,
suggest that reproductive maturation may J. Brown et al. 2002, Connolly et al. 2000,
be inhibited by physical closeness to parents Giordano et al. 2005, Rostosky et al. 2004).
and accelerated by distance from them, which
would minimize inbreeding and thereby Interpersonal perspectives. Interpersonal
increase reproductive fitness. Although the perspectives emphasize the nature and
timing of puberty is associated with romantic processes of changes in adolescents’ social rela-
and sexual behavior (e.g., Dornbusch et al. tionships and the contribution of these changes
1981, Ellis 2004), recent research findings raise to individual development. In interdependence
expectations for more-specific targeted studies models, joint patterns of actions, cognitions,
of the implications of changes predicted by and emotions between two individuals are
evolutionary theory to play a role in adolescent the primary locus of interpersonal influences
romantic relationships (Susman 2006). (Hinde 1997, Kelley et al. 2002, Laursen
A related line of research involves examin- & Bukowski 1997). During adolescence,
ing neurotransmitters such as oxytocin and va- interdependencies in family relationships
sopressin in relation to the behavioral features continue, though often in different forms than
of adolescent sexuality and romantic relation- in earlier life, and interdependencies with
ships (Reis et al. 2000). Behavioral genetics has friends and romantic partners become more
not yet been used to inform research on behav- apparent (Collins 2003). Research inspired by
iors peculiar to early sexual activity or roman- interdependence views typically focuses on the
tic relationships (Collins & Steinberg 2006). aspects of couple interactions that may favor
Evolutionary perspectives have guided a sig- stability or change in romantic relationships.
nificant amount of research on adult roman- A particularly influential interdependence
tic relationships (Buss 2005), but the applica- view, attachment theory, holds that a history
tion to adolescent romantic relationships has of sensitive, responsive interactions and strong
primarily consisted of theoretical papers (e.g., emotional bonds with caregivers in childhood
Laursen & Jensen-Campbell 1999). Thus, re- facilitates adaptation to the transitions of ado-
search activities derived from biosocial theories lescence (Allen & Land 1999, Collins & Sroufe
of adolescent romantic relationships promise 1999). Mature romantic attachments, however,
potential growth but have yielded little thus require the cognitive and emotional matu-
far. rity to integrate attachment, caregiving, and
sexual/reproductive components (Waters &
Ecological perspectives. Ecological perspec- Cummings 2000). Although the necessary
tives emphasize the social and cultural contexts maturity level rarely is achieved before late ado-
that encourage or constrain close relationships lescence (Allen & Land 1999), the developmen-
and endow them with meaning and significance. tal process begins earlier with a redistribution
In this view, events that occur in other set- of attachment-related functions (for example, a
tings and relationships inevitably affect adoles- desire for proximity, relying on the other per-
cent romantic relationships, which in turn can son for unconditional acceptance) to friends and
impinge on those settings. Among the poten- boyfriends or girlfriends (Furman & Wehner
tially influential ecological features are histor- 1997).
25.4 Collins · Welsh · FurmanANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
These theories address different levels of Obtaining representative samples. The
analysis and, thus, are complementary rather nature and some features of adolescent ro-
than mutually exclusive or incompatible. De- mantic relationships may vary across diverse
spite the apparent relevance of biosocial, cultural, racial, and socioeconomic contexts.
ecological, and interdependence formulations, Researchers seek to capture the range of this
however, theories in this area have not de- diversity in their sampling strategies, but
veloped to the point of widespread influence the task is difficult. Recruiting from schools
over research in the area. The time is right for is one of the best strategies for obtaining
further theoretical development to guide fu- representative samples. However, school
ture progress in the area. One fruitful direc- administrators are often reluctant to endorse
tion may be more integrative theorizing. For research focused on controversial issues such
example, developmental systems models (e.g., as adolescent romantic relationships. Creative
Magnusson & Stattin 1998), though concep- ways of addressing the concerns of school
tually and methodologically daunting, call at- administrators may be needed to obtain such
tention to the contrasting and the overlapping samples (Welsh et al. 2005). Some researchers
implications of multiple perspectives for ado- attempt to recruit participants from commu-
lescent romantic relationships. nity organizations or locations (e.g., churches,
shopping malls); adolescents found in particu-
lar community organizations or locations may
Methodological Issues be less likely than are those recruited from
schools to represent the adolescent population.
Four methodological challenges confront re-
Increasingly, researchers use Internet social
searchers when designing and interpreting
networking Web sites (e.g., Facebook and
studies of adolescents’ romantic relationships:
Myspace) to recruit research participants. This
(a) issues of operational definition, (b) represen-
strategy potentially offers access to larger
tativeness of samples, (c) the ephemeral nature
numbers of potential participants than the
and instability of adolescent relationships, and
recruiting methods mentioned above. Recent
(d ) the interdependence of dyadic data.
statistics show that 87% of U.S. teens use
the Internet, and the number of adolescents
Operational definitions. Conceptualizations using the Internet to communicate continues
of adolescent romantic relationships have been to increase (Lenhart et al. 2005).
remarkably consistent across existing studies, Regardless of how the sample is obtained,
yet no standard operational definitions exist nor adolescents and parents who consent to partic-
has the broader domain of romantic experi- ipate in research on adolescent romantic rela-
ences been well specified. Researchers typically tionships may differ systematically from ado-
have asked participants if they have a roman- lescents who are unwilling to participate. For
tic relationship (or a boyfriend or girlfriend), example, some researchers have found that ide-
and the participants decide on the basis of their ologically conservative parents and adolescents
own definition. A brief description is some- are often less willing to participate in research
times provided for clarification (e.g., “when you on romantic relationships than are more liberal
like a guy [girl] and he [she] likes you back”) parents. Some researchers address this prob-
(Giordano et al. 2006). Researchers often also lem by using samples originally recruited for
specify a minimum duration (e.g., at least one broader purposes. For example, researchers can
month long) in an effort to narrow the criteria use publicly available datasets of nationally rep-
(Welsh & Dickson 2005). Differences in defini- resentative samples collected to assess adoles-
tion affect estimates of the frequency and dura- cent health broadly rather than romantic rela-
tion of romantic relationships and, very likely, tionships specifically (e.g., Bearman et al. 1997).
findings from research (Furman & Hand 2006). Two limitations are inherent in this approach.
www.annualreviews.org • Adolescent Romantic Relationships 25.5ANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
One is that researchers are restricted to the vari- brief phone calls inquiring about relationship
ables collected in the original study. The sec- transitions, and regular intensive relationship
ond is that the data likely come only from self- histories (Giordano et al. 2006).
report questionnaires, potentially confounding
Interdependence of data. Romantic relation-
the findings with common method variance. A
ships are dyadic; thus, data from the two
variation on this strategy is collecting new data
participants are not independent. The recent
from participants of a previous intensive lon-
widespread use of multilevel modeling tech-
gitudinal study in which the participants are
niques allows romantic relationship researchers
already committed to the larger developmen-
to separate the variance in outcome vari-
tal project (e.g., Capaldi et al. 2001, Sroufe
ables into individual and dyadic components.
et al. 2005). The problem associated with this
Such techniques also address the lack of inde-
approach is that the intensive data collec-
pendence in the couple members’ responses.
tion typical of well-conceptualized longitudi-
Non-independence violates the assumptions of
nal studies often necessitates relatively small
common statistical techniques such as multiple
sample sizes. Thus, the goal of recruiting rep-
regression by incorrectly estimating error terms
resentative samples typically requires carefully
(for a definitive treatment of statistical analysis
reasoned trade-offs among the strengths and
of dyadic data, see Kenny et al. 2006).
weaknesses of various strategies and detailed
reporting of the decision processes associated
with a particular study. ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP
Regardless of research design, the possibility PROCESSES DURING
of bias from untruthful reporting always looms. ADOLESCENCE
It is unclear whether adolescent participants A fundamental challenge in research on ado-
are any more or less likely than those of other lescent romantic experiences is identifying the
ages to either exaggerate or suppress reports relevant dimensions of variation. Collins (2003)
of dating, sexual activity, and so forth. Prudent has delineated five features with documented
researchers provide for other, as well as self, relevance to the current and/or long-term sig-
reports and additional checks on the reliability nificance for individual functioning and fur-
and validity of data. ther development: romantic involvement; part-
ner identity; relationship content; relationship
Short duration and instability of relation- quality; and cognitive and emotional processes
ships. Researchers interested in development in the relationship. Romantic involvement or
face the particular challenge of the relatively activity refers to whether or not a person dates,
transitory phenomena of adolescents’ romantic when s/he began dating, the duration of the re-
relationships (B. Brown et al. 1999). Relation- lationship, and the frequency and consistency
ships may come and go before the researcher of dating and relationships. Partner identity is
has had the opportunity to study them. Tra- concerned with the characteristics of the per-
ditional longitudinal designs typically specify son with whom an adolescent has a romantic
data collection at regular time intervals (often experience (e.g., dating). Content refers to what
one year) rather than sampling at the time a the members of the dyad do and do not do
new relationship emerges. Studies of the ini- together. Relationship quality pertains to the
tiation, development, and decline of particular relative degree of positive, supportive, benefi-
relationships are needed, however, to discern cent experiences as compared to the negative,
how each relationship contributes to choice of potentially detrimental ones. Cognitive and
partners and behavior in future relationships. emotional processes include perceptions, at-
Some methodological techniques used to ad- tributions, and representations of oneself, the
dress this complex issue are daily diary studies partner, and the relationship, as well as the
(Bolger et al. 2003, Downey et al. 1998), regular emotions and moods elicited in romantic
25.6 Collins · Welsh · FurmanANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
encounters and affective statements associated in the past 18 months than are adolescents in
with involvement in and the dissolution of re- African American, Hispanic, Native American,
lationships (e.g., depressive symptoms). and European American groups (Carver et al.
Gonadarche:
2003). Latina early-adolescent girls described increased release of
being more closely supervised in contexts in estrogen in females
Involvement in Romantic which they interacted with males than African and testosterone in
Relationships American early-adolescent girls report. Both males
Becoming involved in romantic relationships Latina and African American early-adolescent Adrenarche:
and the frequency of romantic experiences are girls kept their early boyfriends a secret from increased activity of
the adrenal glands just
embedded in the adolescent social system. Prior their family members, especially their moth-
prior to puberty
to adolescence, interactions typically occur with ers. They explained that they kept these re-
peers of the same gender; most friendship pairs lationships secret because they feared being
are of the same gender (Kovacs et al. 1996). forced to end the relationship (O’Sullivan &
Affiliation with mixed-gender groups typically Meyer-Bahlburg 2003).
follows in early to middle adolescence and fa- Less is known about the developmental
cilitates the progression from same-gendered course of the relationships of gay, lesbian, and
friendships to dyadic romantic relationships bisexual adolescents. Among sexual-minority
(Connolly et al. 2004). Across the teenage years, adolescents, approximately 93% of boys and
young people spend increasing amounts of time 85% of girls report having had some same-
with other gender peers and romantic part- sex activity (Savin-Williams & Diamond 2000).
ners (Laursen & Williams 1997, Richards et al. The number of romantic relationships reported
1998). By early adulthood, time with romantic by youths involved in organizations for sexual
partners increases further at the expense of in- minorities is comparable to the number for het-
volvement with friends and crowds (Reis et al. erosexual youths (Diamond & Lucas 2004).The
1993). average age of a first “serious” same-gender re-
The timing of involvement is often at- lationship is 18 years (Floyd & Stein 2002).
tributed to the onset of puberty; however, Same-gender dating can be uncommon, how-
researchers now have demonstrated that go- ever, in locations where fewer adolescents are
nadarche (development of the gonads, with openly identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual
increased release of estrogen in females and (Diamond et al. 1999). In many instances, same-
testosterone in males) is distinct from changes sex romantic attraction puts adolescents at risk
that may be relevant to romantic interest. for violence; youths who report same-sex or
Adrenarche, or the increased activity of the both-sex romantic attraction are more likely
adrenal glands just prior to puberty, appears to experience extreme forms of violence than
to be more strongly predictive of sexual in- are those who report only other-sex romantic
terest and awareness than gonadarche, which interests (Russell et al. 2001).
occurs later (e.g., Halpern 2003, McClintock An important caveat is that the early roman-
& Herdt 1996). Moreover, researchers re- tic experiences of many youths include both
peatedly have demonstrated the independent same-sex and other-sex partners. The majority
contributions of social expectations, especially of sexual-minority youths report dating mem-
age-graded behavior norms, to the initiation of bers of the other sex (Savin-Williams 1996).
dating in Western countries (e.g., Dornbusch Approximately 42% of sexual-minority ado-
et al. 1981). Cultural norms also affect the activ- lescent girls and 79% of sexual-minority ado-
ities that are expected and approved within dat- lescent boys report some sexual activity with
ing relationships (Feldman et al. 1999, Seiffge- a member of the other sex (D’Augelli 1998).
Krenke 2006, Silbereisen & Schwarz 1998). Such dating can either provide a cover for a
For example, Asian American adolescents are minority sexual identity or help clarify one’s
less likely to have had a romantic relationship identity (Diamond et al. 1999). A significant
www.annualreviews.org • Adolescent Romantic Relationships 25.7ANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
proportion of women also characterize them- nificantly alike on certain social and psycho-
selves as “mostly heterosexual” (Austin et al. logical characteristics, e.g., popularity, physi-
2007). Same-gender attraction, sexual behavior, cal attraction, and depressive symptoms (Simon
Field of availability:
range of persons and identity are not perfectly correlated with et al. 2008). This “selective partnering” is also
acceptable as potential one another (Diamond 2003, Savin-Williams evident in patterns of psychological and physi-
romantic partners; 2006); thus, sexual identity and the gender of cal aggression in young at-risk couples (Capaldi
commonly determined the person one is attracted to can be quite & Crosby 1997).
by community and
fluid over time, especially for women. Not sur- Emotional dimensions of selective partner-
cultural norms
prisingly, then, estimates of the prevalence of ing generally have been neglected in research.
homosexuality can range from 1% to 21% An exception is reports of partner choice among
depending upon the definition. Such variabil- sexual-minority adolescents. Sexual-minority
ity underscores the idea that no simple di- males typically report that they were first sex-
chotomy exists between heterosexuality and ually rather than emotionally attracted to an-
homosexuality. other male, whereas sexual-minority females
were evenly divided between first having had an
emotional or sexual attraction to another female
Partner Characteristics or a male, as was the case with their first same-
The characteristics of romantic partners con- gender sexual partners (Savin-Williams &
tribute to both the distinguishing features and Diamond 2000). The emotional and sexual
potential developmental sequelae of an ado- attraction processes associated with the de-
lescent romantic relationship. Little is known, mographic correspondence between heterosex-
however, about adolescents’ selection of part- ual partners is a promising future research
ners or the extent to which partner charac- direction.
teristics are important to the development of The influence of partner characteristics has
each member of the adolescent couple (Furman thus far been neglected in research. Girls’ work-
& Simon 2008). The small amount of avail- ing models of romantic relationships are related
able information is largely descriptive. Like to their partners’ behavior, as well as their own
adults, adolescents report that their ideal part- (Furman & Simon 2006), but it is not clear
ners are intelligent, interpersonally skillful, and if these relations reflect “selective partnering”
physically appealing (Regan 2003, Roscoe et al. or socialization in the relationship. In one of
1987), but the match between ideal and actual the few studies to distinguish socialization and
partners has not been studied (Collins 2003). selection effects, partners’ popularity, depres-
For many adolescents, community and cultural sive symptoms, relational aggression, and rela-
norms determine the field of availability, or tional victimization reliably predicted changes
standards for who is acceptable as a romantic over time in adolescents’ status on these same
target. Whether relationships conform to a cul- variables, controlling for initial similarity be-
turally or socially prescribed field of availability tween partners. The magnitude and direction
affects both the individual and the relationship of change varied according to adolescents’ and
in multiple ways (e.g., Coates 1999). partners’ functioning prior to the relationship,
Most is known about the demographic even when best friend characteristics are con-
match between the two adolescents in a couple. trolled (Simon et al. 2008). Further research
Among heterosexual adolescents, males tend to addressing similar questions in later, as well as
choose dating partners close to their own age, early, adolescence is needed to fill this gap in
whereas females’ dating partners are often older the literature.
than they are. Dating partners are similar in
race, ethnicity, and other demographic charac- Content
teristics (Carver et al. 2003). Recent findings Relationship content refers to partners’ shared
also show young adolescent partners to be sig- activities. Adolescents engage in distinct
25.8 Collins · Welsh · FurmanANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
patterns of interaction that differ from their Themes of shame and degradation are asso-
interactions with parents or peers. Interac- ciated with sexual activity outside of roman-
tions with romantic partners contain more con- tic relationships, although these themes are less
flict than with friends and less responsive- strong for African American adolescents than
ness than either interactions with best friends for European American youths (O’Sullivan &
or those with mothers. Despite these inter- Meyer-Bahlburg 2003). These views may ex-
actional differences, adolescents nevertheless plain the association between depressive symp-
perceived more support from their romantic toms and sexual behavior outside of romantic
partners than from their mothers (Furman & relationships in female adolescents and early
Shomaker 2008). One explanation for these un- adults (Grello et al. 2003, 2006).
expected findings may come from studies show- Normative models also have stimulated re-
ing that adolescents project their perceptions search on sexual behaviors other than in-
of their own behaviors onto their perceptions tercourse. These studies have revealed that
of their partner’s behaviors (Welsh & Dickson “lighter” sexual behaviors such as kissing, hold-
2005). In these studies, adolescent couples, as ing hands, and hugging are positively asso-
well as independent observers of their inter- ciated with positive parent-child relationships
actions, also tended to describe the couple re- and with romantic relationship satisfaction and
lationships as egalitarian. In most of the cou- commitment (Welsh et al. 2005, Williams et al.
ples, adolescents perceived themselves and their 2008). An important agenda for future research
partners as equally contributing emotional re- is examining the developmental significance of
sources, sharing power in interaction, and shar- these more affectionate sexual behaviors in the
ing decision-making responsibility. Perceived context of adolescents’ romantic relationships.
inequality in these respects has repeatedly been The potential significance of sexual behav-
associated with more psychological symptoms ior for adolescent development depends more
in the members of the couple, especially females than is commonly recognized on the moderat-
(Galliher et al. 2004). Two forms of relation- ing influences of developmental status, the na-
ship content have been the focus of considerable ture of the relationship, and the implicit mean-
popular, as well as scholarly, attention: sexual ing of sexual activity for the adolescent. For
behavior and aggression between partners. example, engaging in genitally stimulating or
“heavy” sexual behaviors in early adolescence
Sexual behavior. Romantic relationships are is consistently associated with numerous prob-
the context in which the majority of adoles- lems (e.g., depression, violence, substance use,
cents’ sexual behavior occurs (Manning et al. hostile family processes, poor academic partici-
2000). Adolescent relationships have rarely pation, and poor romantic relationship quality)
been the focus of investigations of sexual be- (Welsh et al. 2005, Williams et al. 2008). How-
havior, however (Bouchey & Furman 2003, ever, engaging in these behaviors, including in-
Crockett et al. 2003, Florsheim 2003). Only tercourse, within the context of a romantic rela-
in the past decade have researchers, under the tionship in late adolescence has not been linked
influence of developmental theories, begun to with greater incidence of problems (Grello et al.
examine the development of adolescent sexu- 2003, Welsh et al. 2005). The subjective
ality from a normative perspective and to in- meaning of sexual behaviors within romantic
vestigate the contexts in which sexual behav- relationships varies in different stages of devel-
ior occurs (Diamond & Savin-Williams 2003, opment (Welsh et al. 2000). As romantic rela-
Florsheim 2003, Welsh et al. 2000). Such stud- tionships become more intimate and commit-
ies have shown, for example, that adolescent ted during late adolescence, sexual behaviors
females perceive strong norms that sexual be- may represent a physical expression of the part-
havior should occur within the context of ro- ners’ intimacy and commitment, whereas sexual
mantic relationships and not outside of it. behavior in early adolescence is more likely to
www.annualreviews.org • Adolescent Romantic Relationships 25.9ANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
signify an effort to avoid losing the relation- toward their girlfriends is associated with re-
ship (O’Sullivan & Meyer-Bahlburg 2003) or a cent hostile discussions about women with close
difficulty communicating about sexual behavior friends (Capaldi et al. 2001). These accumu-
(Widman et al. 2006). lating findings have prompted researchers to
shift their attention from questions of whether
and how much aggression occurs in adoles-
Dating aggression. Aggression between ro-
cent romantic relationships to examine the pro-
mantic partners is common in both other-sex
cesses that account for differential manifesta-
and same-sex romantic relationships in adoles-
tions of dating aggression and the conditions
cence. Although estimates vary widely across
under which it is more or less likely (e.g., Buzy
sample and assessment methods, 10% to 48%
et al. 2004).
of adolescents report experiencing physical ag-
gression in their dating relationships, and one-
quarter to one-half of adolescents report psy- Relationship Quality
chological aggression (Halpern et al. 2001, Relationship quality refers to the degree to
2004; Jouriles et al. 2005). Moreover, although which partners manifest intimacy, affection,
physical aggression was once believed to be pri- and nurturance. Low-quality relationships
marily inflicted by males upon females, recent are marked by irritation, antagonism, and
investigations reveal either no gender differ- notably high levels of conflict or controlling
ences or higher prevalence rates for adolescent behavior (Galliher et al. 2004). High-quality
females as aggressors or initiators of aggres- relationships characterized by supportiveness
sion (Archer 2000; Capaldi et al. 2007; Halpern and intimacy are associated with measures of
et al. 2001, 2004). The meaning and develop- functioning and well being for the individuals
mental implications of adolescent female dating involved; similarly, quality romantic relation-
aggression, however, likely differs from the im- ships in adolescence are associated with in-
plications of male aggression. Further research creased likelihood of positive relationships and
is needed to examine this particular hypothe- relationship commitment in early adulthood
sis and to examine female dating aggression in (Seiffge-Krenke & Lang 2002). More negative
general. qualities likewise have been linked to varied
Both physical and relational aggression (at- negative outcomes (for a review, see Furman
tempting to cause harm by damaging one’s rela- & Collins 2008). Intimacy is widely regarded
tionships) increase from early to middle adoles- as a likely component of relationship quality.
cence (Halpern et al. 2001, Pepler et al. 2006). However, little research has examined this
Investigations have linked dating aggression in construct in the context of adolescent romantic
adolescent romantic relationships to parental relationships.
and peer influences (Arriaga & Foshee 2004, Longitudinal findings confirm links be-
Capaldi et al. 2001, Kinsfogel & Grych 2004). tween the quality of adolescents’ relationships
Adolescent males exposed to greater parental and the quality of family relationships from
conflict are more likely to perceive aggression birth forward (Collins & Van Dulmen 2006,
as justifiable in romantic relationships and re- Furman & Collins 2008). Qualities of friend-
port higher levels of verbal and physical aggres- ships in middle and late adolescence are as-
sion in their romantic relationships. Females’ sociated with concurrent qualities of roman-
aggressive behavior in romantic relationships, tic relationships (Collins & Van Dulmen 2006,
on the other hand, is generally not linked with Furman et al. 2002). The nature and processes
parental conflict (Kinsfogel & Grych 2004), of these developmentally significant relations
highlighting the different trajectories associ- among relationships is a promising area for fur-
ated with male and female aggression. Peers ther study.
also play a formative role in the development Up to now, research findings have revealed
of males’ dating aggression. Males’ aggression more about the observable characteristics of
25.10 Collins · Welsh · FurmanANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
adolescents’ friendships and romantic rela- tive themes were surprisingly similar across the
tionships than about the meaning of deeper, 8- to 10-year gap between waves of the study. A
less-discernible qualities such as intimacy. As desire for closeness and distance were a domi-
interest in adolescent romantic relationships in- nant theme in the relationships of participants
creases and diversifies, attention to these sub- at both ages. In longitudinal research, adoles-
jective features likely will do so as well. cents increasingly report that their first recog-
Little is known about the likelihood or the nizable feelings of love occurred at a later age
determinants of either successful or unsuc- than they had reported at earlier time points.
cessful adolescent romantic relationships. In This pattern likely reflects changes in personal
particular, it is unclear how serious or long definitions of love, perhaps resulting from in-
lasting these relationships ideally should be. creasing cognitive and emotional maturity and
Most appear to be relatively brief, lasting wider experience in relationships (Montgomery
between 6–12 months, but variation around & Sorell 1998, Shulman & Scharf 2000).
this norm is considerable (Connolly & McIsaac Heterosexual adolescents report that
2008). Depending on duration and the content association with other-gender peers is the
and quality of the relationship, adolescent most common source of their positive affect
romantic involvement has been found to be (Wilson-Shockley 1985 as cited in Larson et al.
associated with both social competence and 1999; Larson & Richards 1998). Moreover,
risk (Furman et al. 2008). A series of very short- having a romantic relationship and the quality
term relationships is associated with greater of that relationship commonly are associated
depressive symptomatology ( Joyner & Udry positively with feelings of self-worth (Connolly
2000) and increased rates of problem behavior & Konarski 1994, Harter 1999). By late adoles-
in the partners (Zimmer-Gembeck et al. 2001). cence, self-perceived competence in romantic
A particularly persistent finding is that teenage relationships emerges as a reliable component
relationships that result in early marriage have of general competence (Masten et al. 1995).
generally been associated with high risk for At the same time, adolescents in romantic
marital dissatisfaction and divorce (Karney relationships report experiencing more conflict
& Bradbury 1995). At the same time, recent than other adolescents report (Laursen 1995),
findings show that adolescent relationships of and mood swings—a stereotype of adolescent
moderate length (e.g., several weeks to several emotional life—are more extreme for those in-
months) appear to be effective preparation for volved in romantic relationships (Larson et al.
high-quality romantic relationships in early 1999, Savin-Williams 1996). In a widely cited
adulthood (Madsen & Collins 2005). Variabil- finding, adolescents who had begun romantic
ity in the timing, duration, and quality clearly relationships in the past year manifested more
are significant determinants of the psycholog- symptoms of depression than did adolescents
ical and social impact of teenage relationships not in romantic relationships ( Joyner & Udry
and thus warrant additional emphasis in the 2000). Indeed, the most common trigger of
next phase of research in the area. the first episode of a major depressive disorder
is a romantic break-up (Monroe et al. 1999).
Subsequent studies have identified important
Cognitive and Emotional moderators of this association (e.g., Ayduk
Processes et al. 2001, Davila et al. 2004, Grello et al.
Concepts of relationships and perceptions of 2003, Harper & Welsh 2007). For example,
their social functions change with increasing break-ups, rather than involvement in romantic
age. In a longitudinal analysis of relationship relationships per se, may explain the frequent
narratives (Waldinger et al. 2002), the structure reports of elevated depressive symptoms.
and complexity of narratives increased between Individual differences in cognitive and emo-
middle adolescence and age 25, whereas narra- tional processes also play a key role in romantic
www.annualreviews.org • Adolescent Romantic Relationships 25.11ANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
relationships. A striking case is the phe- ings. The eventual explanation almost certainly
nomenon of rejection sensitivity, which refers will implicate cognitive and emotional mat-
to individuals’ tendency to anxiously expect, uration, achievements regarding identity and
Rejection sensitivity:
an individual’s perceive, and overreact to rejection (Downey autonomy, increasing diversification of social
tendency to anxiously et al. 1999). This cognitive and behavioral syn- networks, and contextual changes associated
expect, perceive, and drome is hypothesized to arise from experi- with impending adulthood.
overreact to rejection ences of rejection in parent-child relationships
and also in relations with peers and, possi- INTERPERSONAL CONTEXTS
bly, romantic partners (Downey et al. 1999).
Romantic relationships occur in multiple con-
Compared to adolescents with low scores on
texts, representing varied levels of analysis, and
a standardized measure of rejection sensi-
these contexts may shape and constrain the
tivity, those with high scores characteristi-
features of relationships, from the timing and
cally expect romantic partners to reject them
forms of involvement to partner choice and per-
and, indeed, do experience disproportionately
missible activities (Seiffge-Krenke 2006). Evi-
frequent rejection. Furthermore, the high-
dence of cultural and subcultural variations is
rejection-sensitive individuals report less sat-
cited above. This section is devoted to the most
isfaction in their relationships and more de-
extensively studied contextual influences on
pressive symptoms (Ayduk et al. 2001, Downey
adolescent romantic relationships, each part-
et al. 1999).
ner’s current and past experiences with par-
ents and peers (Collins & Van Dulmen 2006,
Concluding Comment Connolly & McIsaac 2008).
Although some adolescents at every age experi-
ence beginnings and endings of romantic rela- Peer Affiliations and Friendships
tionships (Connolly & McIsaac 2008), relative The assumption that the peer social system is
contrasts can be seen in the features of relation- the staging ground for romantic relationships
ships in early, middle, and late adolescence. In- during adolescence pervades research on the
volvement in dating increases notably between topic. Having a large number of other-gender
the ages of 12 and 18, and ending a romantic re- friends and being liked by many of one’s peers
lationship becomes less likely during the same in adolescence is correlated with current and
period (Connolly & McIsaac 2008). Early and future dating patterns (Connolly et al. 2000,
later adolescents’ criteria for partner selections Kuttler & LaGreca 2004). General social com-
differ, as does the content of exchanges between petence with peers is associated with romantic
partners. Perceptions of partner supportive- relationship activity in early and middle adoles-
ness, interdependence, and closeness increase cence (Furman et al. 2008). Moreover, for early
with age (Laursen & Williams 1997, Zimmer- adolescents, having a boyfriend or girlfriend
Gembeck 1999). Collins (2003) has suggested confers social status and facilitates “fitting in.”
that a shift occurs between ages 15 and 17 in the For example, both Latina and female African
features and implications of romantic relation- American early adolescents described wanting
ships. This apparent mid-adolescent shift un- to have a boyfriend in order to demonstrate
doubtedly represents an accumulation of grad- their popularity among their peers. Boyfriends
ual changes that appear abrupt because most who were attractive, popular, somewhat older
studies are cross-sectional comparisons of age than them, or who brought them gifts were es-
groups. As evidence of age-related patterns in pecially desired (O’Sullivan & Meyer-Bahlburg
key aspects of romantic relationships accumu- 2003).
lates, however, pressures are increasing for de- The potential role of friendship in the de-
velopmental accounts that explain the find- velopment of romantic relationships is both
25.12 Collins · Welsh · FurmanANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
fundamental and multifaceted. Relationships cohesion, and respect for privacy experienced
with friends function both as prototypes of in families is related positively to intimacy
interactions compatible with romantic relation- in late-adolescent romantic relationships, with
Nurturant-involved
ships and as testing grounds for experiencing especially strong links emerging for women. parenting: parent
and managing emotions in the context of volun- Parent-adolescent conflict resolution is also as- behavior marked by
tary close relationships (Connolly et al. 2004). sociated with later conflict resolution with ro- warmth, active interest
Friends also serve as models and sources of so- mantic partners (Conger et al. 2000, Cui & in and acceptance of
the adolescent, and
cial support for initiating and pursuing roman- Conger 2008, Donnellan et al. 2005, Feldman
encouragement of
tic relationships and also for weathering periods et al. 1998). In contrast, unskilled parenting positive behaviors
of difficulty in them, thus potentially contribut- and aversive family communications are asso-
ing to variations in the qualities of later roman- ciated with later aggression toward romantic
tic relationships (Connolly & Goldberg 1999). partners, and the degree of negative emotional-
Cognitive representations of friendships and ity in parent-adolescent dyads is correlated with
the perceived qualities of interactions within negative emotionality and poor quality interac-
them are associated significantly with inter- tions with romantic partners in early adulthood
actions in romantic relationships (Furman & (Conger et al. 2000, K. Kim et al. 2001). This
Shomaker 2008, Furman et al. 2002). Relatively association appears to be mediated by negative
little is known about the links between sex- affect and ineffective monitoring and discipline
ual minorities’ friendships and romantic rela- in parent-adolescent relationships (Conger
tionships. Number of friends appears to be un- et al. 2000).
related to romantic relationship involvement, Interactions with parents in earlier periods
although those who have had more romantic of development also have been implicated in the
relationships report more worries about losing stability and quality of early-adult romantic re-
friends (Diamond & Lucas 2004). lationships (Simpson et al. 2007). Parent-child
Contrary to common stereotypes of cross- relationships appear to account for more vari-
purposes between parents and peers, the peer ance in romantic-relationship behavior than ei-
and family domains are often similar, and fam- ther sibling relationships or the models pro-
ily and peer influences commonly act in concert vided by parents’ own marriages. Contrary to
with one another with respect to romantic re- common speculation, the majority of findings
lationships. For example, a stable, harmonious from studies that include assessment of sibling
family life reduces the risk of affiliation with de- relationships have revealed no significant asso-
viant peers, and the two jointly reduce the risk of ciations with the features of interactions with
choosing deviant romantic partners (Donnellan romantic partners (Conger et al. 2000). Simi-
et al. 2005, Zimmer-Gembeck et al. 2001). larly, parental conflict and marital disharmony
Family and peer influences also may moderate appear to affect the romantic relationships of
each other. Parental support is associated with offspring indirectly, through the deleterious ef-
a reduction in criminality for those without a fects of marital stressors on nurturant, involved
romantic partner, but the support of a partner parenting (Conger et al. 2000, Cui & Conger
is the more important factor for those with a 2008). One avenue through which marital stress
romantic partner (Van Dulmen et al. 2008). and parental separation affect adolescents’ ro-
mantic lives is through increased risk for early
romantic involvement, which in turn is associ-
Relationships with Parents ated with poor individual adjustment (Furman
Nurturant-involved parenting in adolescence is & Collins 2008).
predictive of warmth, support, and low hos- Not surprisingly, the characteristics of rela-
tility toward romantic partners in early adult- tionships with parents and with peers become
hood. Moreover, the degree of flexible control, more extensively interrelated with features of
www.annualreviews.org • Adolescent Romantic Relationships 25.13ANRV364-PS60-25 ARI 11 September 2008 0:23
romantic relationships during late adolescence (Harper et al. 2006, Harper & Welsh 2007).
and early adulthood (Meeus et al. 2007). Per- Poor-quality romantic relationships are further
haps the growing importance of romantic rela- associated with alcohol and drug use, poor aca-
tionships calls attention to the commonalities demic performance, externalizing and internal-
across types of relationships. It is equally likely, izing symptoms, poor emotional health, and
however, that the correlations among early low job competence (Zimmer-Gembeck et al.
adults’ relationships reflect their common as- 2001, 2004).
sociations with parents and with peers prior Contrary to widespread skepticism, roman-
to adolescence (Collins & Van Dulmen 2006, tic experiences also appear to be positively re-
Waters & Cummings 2000). The processes that lated to qualities of romantic relationships in
account for these developmentally significant later life. Longitudinal research in Germany
relations among differing relationships are a showed that quality of romantic relationships in
promising area for further study. middle adolescence was significantly and pos-
itively related to commitment in other rela-
tionships in early adulthood (Seiffge-Krenke
SIGNIFICANCE OF & Lang 2002). Apparently, romantic relation-
ADOLESCENT ROMANTIC ships can be associated with healthy, norma-
RELATIONSHIPS tive development in some adolescents and can
The developmental significance of romantic re- be symptomatic of pathology in others (Welsh
lationships depends on the behavioral, cogni- et al. 2003). Better understanding is needed of
tive, and emotional processes occurring within the factors that differentiate adolescents whose
the relationship, on the individual characteris- romantic relationships are evidence of nor-
tics of the adolescents (age, attachment styles, mal, developmental processes and those whose
rejection sensitivity, self-silencing, gender), and romantic relationships are symptomatic of or
on the contexts in which they occur (Furman may cause psychological turmoil (Florsheim
& Collins 2008, Furman & Shaffer 2003). 2003).
Accumulating findings document statistically These cross-sectional correlations plausibly
reliable associations between adolescents’ ro- could reflect either the effects of romantic ex-
mantic experiences and multiple aspects of perience on adjustment or the converse. For
individual development: forming a personal example, “off-time” dating or romantic experi-
identity, adjusting to changes in familial rela- ence beginning in late childhood and early ado-
tionships, furthering harmonious relations with lescence is associated with subsequent miscon-
peers, succeeding (or not) in school, looking duct and poor academic performance, which
ahead to future careers, and developing sexu- in turn are risk factors for further negative
ality (regardless of the extent of sexual activity) romantic relationships (Furman et al. 2008,
(Furman & Collins 2008, Furman & Shaffer Zimmer-Gembeck et al. 2001). Similarly, ro-
2003). The nature and quality of romantic mantic involvement has repeatedly been linked
experiences are correlated with self-esteem, to depressive symptoms, especially for adoles-
self-confidence, and social competence (Pearce cents engaging in casual sex or with a history of
et al. 2002; Zimmer-Gembeck et al. 2001, unresponsive familial relationships, and these
2004). Conversely, anxiety over preserving a conditions further increase the risk of negative
relationship often results in self-silencing, in romantic experiences (e.g., Ayduk et al. 2001,
which individuals suppress their thoughts and Davila et al. 2004, Grello et al. 2003, Harper
opinions out of fear of losing their intimate & Welsh 2007). Inferences of causality aside,
partner and relationship. Self-silencing in turn current findings provide an impetus for test-
is associated with poorer communication be- ing numerous hypotheses about the nature and
tween partners, higher levels of depressive extent of links between features of romantic re-
symptoms, and greater rejection sensitivity lationships and individual functioning.
25.14 Collins · Welsh · FurmanYou can also read
