Effects of relationship threat and ambiguity on empathic accuracy in dating couples

Conventional wisdom tells us that understanding one's partner is beneficial to one's relationship, and as a rule, that seems to be the case. This idea has been supported empirically in marital adjustment research (Long, 1990, 1993; Long & Andrews, 1990; Long, et al., 1999). A more recent literature, however, proposes clarifications and exceptions to this general rule. Sillars and his colleagues (Sillars & Scott, 1983; Sillars, 1998) and Ickes and his colleagues, (Ickes & Simpson, 1997, 2001; Simpson, Ickes & Blackstone, 1995; Simpson, Ickes & Grich, 1999; Dugosh, 1998) have found that understanding may benefit couples as a general rule, but too much understanding regarding high-conflict issues or potentially threatening issues may be detrimental to the relationship. These findings led Ickes and Simpson (1997, 1999) to propose a model of how empathic accuracy is managed in close relationships. The present study attempted to test the model with an “overheard interaction” paradigm. Another purpose of the present study was to test the qualifying effect of adult attachment style on empathic accuracy in relationship-threatening and nonthreatening situations. Currently dating couples participated in the experiment. One of the dating partners participated in an unobtrusively videotaped interview session that was designed to be either threatening or reassuring. Their dating partners then watched the videotape and tried to infer the answers provided by the interviewed partners. The results provided evidence to support the attachment style hypothesis of the study, but not other hypotheses. Methodological constraints of the study may be responsible for this lack of support. Implications of the results and directions for future research are discussed.