Investigation of Consensually Nonmonogamous Relationships: Theories, Methods, and New Directions

Terri D. Conley, Jes L. Matsick, Amy C. Moors, Ali Ziegler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We proposed that the premise that monogamy is the exemplary form of romantic partnership underlies much theory and research on relationship quality, and we addressed how this bias has prompted methodological issues that make it difficult to effectively address the quality of nonmonogamous relationships. Because the idea that consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships are functional (i.e., satisfying and of high quality) is controversial, we included a basic study to assess, in a variety of ways, the quality of these relationships. In that study, we found few differences in relationship functioning between individuals engaged in monogamy and those in CNM relationships. We then considered how existing theories could help researchers to understand CNM relationships and how CNM relationships could shed light on relationship processes, and we proposed a model of how CNM and monogamous relationships differ. Finally, in a second study, we determined that even researchers who present data about CNM are affected by the stigma surrounding such relationships. That is, researchers presenting findings favoring polyamory were perceived as more biased than researchers presenting findings favoring monogamy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)205-232
Number of pages28
JournalPerspectives on Psychological Science
Volume12
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2017

Fingerprint

Research Personnel
Direction compound
Research

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

@article{d9e5e0d38548480382f3436c4c6b4b86,
title = "Investigation of Consensually Nonmonogamous Relationships: Theories, Methods, and New Directions",
abstract = "We proposed that the premise that monogamy is the exemplary form of romantic partnership underlies much theory and research on relationship quality, and we addressed how this bias has prompted methodological issues that make it difficult to effectively address the quality of nonmonogamous relationships. Because the idea that consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships are functional (i.e., satisfying and of high quality) is controversial, we included a basic study to assess, in a variety of ways, the quality of these relationships. In that study, we found few differences in relationship functioning between individuals engaged in monogamy and those in CNM relationships. We then considered how existing theories could help researchers to understand CNM relationships and how CNM relationships could shed light on relationship processes, and we proposed a model of how CNM and monogamous relationships differ. Finally, in a second study, we determined that even researchers who present data about CNM are affected by the stigma surrounding such relationships. That is, researchers presenting findings favoring polyamory were perceived as more biased than researchers presenting findings favoring monogamy.",
author = "Conley, {Terri D.} and Matsick, {Jes L.} and Moors, {Amy C.} and Ali Ziegler",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1745691616667925",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "205--232",
journal = "Perspectives on Psychological Science",
issn = "1745-6916",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

Investigation of Consensually Nonmonogamous Relationships : Theories, Methods, and New Directions. / Conley, Terri D.; Matsick, Jes L.; Moors, Amy C.; Ziegler, Ali.

In: Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 12, No. 2, 01.03.2017, p. 205-232.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Investigation of Consensually Nonmonogamous Relationships

T2 - Theories, Methods, and New Directions

AU - Conley, Terri D.

AU - Matsick, Jes L.

AU - Moors, Amy C.

AU - Ziegler, Ali

PY - 2017/3/1

Y1 - 2017/3/1

N2 - We proposed that the premise that monogamy is the exemplary form of romantic partnership underlies much theory and research on relationship quality, and we addressed how this bias has prompted methodological issues that make it difficult to effectively address the quality of nonmonogamous relationships. Because the idea that consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships are functional (i.e., satisfying and of high quality) is controversial, we included a basic study to assess, in a variety of ways, the quality of these relationships. In that study, we found few differences in relationship functioning between individuals engaged in monogamy and those in CNM relationships. We then considered how existing theories could help researchers to understand CNM relationships and how CNM relationships could shed light on relationship processes, and we proposed a model of how CNM and monogamous relationships differ. Finally, in a second study, we determined that even researchers who present data about CNM are affected by the stigma surrounding such relationships. That is, researchers presenting findings favoring polyamory were perceived as more biased than researchers presenting findings favoring monogamy.

AB - We proposed that the premise that monogamy is the exemplary form of romantic partnership underlies much theory and research on relationship quality, and we addressed how this bias has prompted methodological issues that make it difficult to effectively address the quality of nonmonogamous relationships. Because the idea that consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships are functional (i.e., satisfying and of high quality) is controversial, we included a basic study to assess, in a variety of ways, the quality of these relationships. In that study, we found few differences in relationship functioning between individuals engaged in monogamy and those in CNM relationships. We then considered how existing theories could help researchers to understand CNM relationships and how CNM relationships could shed light on relationship processes, and we proposed a model of how CNM and monogamous relationships differ. Finally, in a second study, we determined that even researchers who present data about CNM are affected by the stigma surrounding such relationships. That is, researchers presenting findings favoring polyamory were perceived as more biased than researchers presenting findings favoring monogamy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016581173&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85016581173&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1745691616667925

DO - 10.1177/1745691616667925

M3 - Article

C2 - 28346120

AN - SCOPUS:85016581173

VL - 12

SP - 205

EP - 232

JO - Perspectives on Psychological Science

JF - Perspectives on Psychological Science

SN - 1745-6916

IS - 2

ER -