A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements

A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements

Rosenfeld, M. J. (2010, April). Meeting online: The rise of the Internet as a social intermediary. Presentation at the Population Association of America Meetings, Dallas, TX. [ Links ]

Shtatfeld, R., & Barak, A. (2009). Factors related to initiating interpersonal contacts on Internet dating sites: A view from the social exchange theory. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 3, 19-37. [ Links ]

Skopek, J., Schulz, F., & Blossfeld, H-P. (2010). Who contacts whom? Educational homophily in online mate selection. European Sociological Review. [ Links ]

Sprecher, S. (1998a). Insiders’ perspectives on reasons for attraction to a close other. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61, 287-300. [ Links ]

Sprecher, S. (1998b). What keeps married partners attracted to each other? Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology, 26, 193-200. [ Links ]

Sprecher, S., & Duck, S. (1994). Sweet talk: The importance of perceived communication for romantic and friendship attraction experience during a get-acquainted date. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 391400. [ Links ]

Sprecher, S., & Felmlee, D. (1992). The influence of parents and friends on the quality and stability of romantic relationships: A three-wave longitudinal investigation. Journal of ily, 54, 888-900. [ Links ]

Sprecher, S., & Felmlee, D. (2000). Romantic partners’ perceptions of social network attributes with the passage of time and relationship transitions. Personal Relationships, 7, 325-340. [ Links ]

Sprecher, S., Felmlee, D., Orbuch, T. L., & Willetts, M. C. (2002). Social networks and change in personal relationships. In A. Vangelisti, H. Reis, & M. A. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Stability and Change in Relationships (pp. 257-284). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [ Links ]

Sprecher, S., & Regan, P. C. (2002). Liking some things (in some people) more than others: Partner preferences in romantic relationships and friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 463-481. [ Links ]

Sprecher, S., Schwartz, P., Harvey, J., & Hatfield, E. (2008). In S. Sprecher, A. Wenzel, & J. Harvey (Eds.), Handbook of relationship initiation (pp. 249-265). New York: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis. [ Links ]

Straaten, I., Engles, R. C. M. E., Finkenauer, C., & Holland, R. W. (2009). Meeting your match: How attractiveness similarity affects approach behavior in mixed-sex dyads. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 685-697. [ Links ]

Sunnafrank, M., & Miller, G. R. (1981). The role of initial conversations in determining attraction to similar and dissimilar strangers. Human Communication Research, 8, 16-25. [ Links ]

Sunnafrank, M., & Ramirez, A. (2004). At first sight: Persistent relational effects of get-acquainted conversations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 361-379. [ Links ]

Tenny, E. R., Turkheimer, E., & Oltmanns, T. F. (2009). Being liked is more than having a good personality: The role of matching. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 479-585. [ Links ]

Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior

Vangelisti, A. L., & Perlman, D. (Eds.) (2006). The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships. Cambridge University Press. [ Links ]

Walster, G.,W., Hatfield, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottman, L. (1966). Journal of https://besthookupwebsites.org/nl/chatspin-overzicht/ Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 508-516. [ Links ]

Thebusinessoflove: Relationship initiation at Internet matchmaking services

Watson, D., Klohnen, E. C., Casillas, A., Simms, E N., Haig, J., & Berry, D. S. (2004). Match makers and deal breakers: Analyses of assortative mating in newlywed couples. Journal of Personality, 72, 1029-1068. [ Links ]

Whisman, M. A., Beach, S. R. H., & Snyder, D. K. (2008). Is marital discord taxonic and can taxonic status be assessed reliably? Results from a national, representative sample of married couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76, 745-755. [ Links ]