CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Attachment and Relationship DynamicsDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionPersonality Traits and Psychology

Becoming irreplaceable: How comparisons to the partner’s alternatives differentially affect low and high self-esteem people

Open access
Murray, Sandra L., Leder, Sadie, MacGregor, Jennifer C.D., Holmes, John G., Pinkus, Rebecca T., Harris, Brianna·2009·Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.07.001PMC PMC2783625
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

It is proposed that people are motivated to feel hard to replace in romantic relationships because feeling irreplaceable fosters trust in a partner's continued responsiveness. By contrast, feeling replaceable motivates compensatory behavior aimed at strengthening the partner's commitment to the relationship. A correlational study of dating couples and 2 experiments examined how satiating/thwarting the goal of feeling irreplaceable differentially affects relationship perception and behavior for low and high self-esteem people. The results revealed that satiating the goal of feeling irreplaceable increases trust for people low in self-esteem. In contrast, thwarting the goal of feeling irreplaceable increases compensatory behaviors meant to prove one's indispensability for people high in self-esteem.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.07.001

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Low self-esteem individuals cope less successfully with various stress-situations in the relationship.

    “In general, low self-esteem individuals cope less successfully with various stress-situations in the relationship (Cameron et al., 2009;Murray, Aloni, et al., 2009;Murray, Leder, et al., 2009).”

    From The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness (2011) · cites this paper as Murray, Leder, et al., 2009

    Experiment 2’s Discussion and the General Discussion report that, when faced with the possibility of being replaced, low-self-esteem participants distanced themselves from their partners, while high-self-esteem participants took compensatory action. This supports the claim for that relationship threat, but the paper’s findings do not establish that low-self-esteem individuals cope less successfully across various relationship stress situations. The supplied copy gives no page numbers for these sections. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Self-esteem has repeatedly been found to moderate processes in romantic relationships.

    “self-esteem has repeatedly been found to moderate processes in romantic relationships (Cameron, Holmes, & Vorauer, 2009;Murray, Aloni, et al., 2009;Murray, Leder, et al., 2009).”

    From The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness (2011) · cites this paper as Murray, Leder, et al., 2009

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Aiken LS West SG 1991 Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions NY Sage Publications
  2. Berscheid E Walster EH 1969 Interpersonal attraction Reading, MA Addison-Wesley Publishing Company
  3. Bowlby J 1969 Attachment and loss (Vol. 1: Attachment) London Hogarth Press
  4. Campbell L Simpson JA Kashy DA Fletcher GJO 2001 Ideal standards, the self, and flexibility of ideals in close relationships Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27 447 462
  5. Eastwick PW Finkel EJ Mochon D Ariely D 2007 Selective versus unselective romantic desire: Not all reciprocity is created equal Psychological Science 18 317 319 17470256
  6. Feeney BC Collins NL 2001 Predictors of caregiving in adult intimate relationships: An attachment theoretical perspective Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80 972 994 11414378
  7. Feingold A 1988 Matching for attractiveness in romantic partners and same-sex friends: A meta-analysis and theoretical critique Psychological Bulletin 104 226 235
  8. Kenny DA 1996 Models of non-independence in dyadic research Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 13 279 294
  9. Leary MR Baumeister RF Zanna MP 2000 The nature and function of self-esteem: Sociometer theory Advances in experimental social psychology 32 2 51 San Diego, CA Academic Press
  10. Lee L Loewenstein G Ariely D Hong J Young J 2008 If I’m not hot, are you hot or not? Physical attractiveness evaluations and dating preferences Psychological Science 19 669 677 18727782
  11. Maner JK DeWall CN Baumeister RF Schaller M 2007 Does social exclusion motivate interpersonal reconnection? Resolving the “porcupine problem” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 92 42 55 17201541
  12. Murray SL Aloni M Holmes JG Derrick JL Stinson DA Leder S 2009 Fostering partner dependence as trust-insurance: The implicit contingencies of the exchange script in close relationships Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96 324 348 19159135 PMC2630589
  13. Murray SL Derrick J Leder S Holmes JG 2008 Balancing connectedness and self-protection goals in close relationships: A levels of processing perspective on risk regulation Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94 429 459 18284291
  14. Murray SL Holmes JG 1997 A leap of faith? Positive illusions in romantic relationships Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23 586 604 8979384
  15. Murray SL Holmes JG in press The architecture of interdependent minds: A dyadic motivation-management theory of mutual responsiveness Psychological Review 19839690
  16. Murray SL Holmes JG Aloni M Pinkus R Derrick JL Leder S in press Commitment insurance: Compensating for the autonomy costs of interdependence in close relationships Journal of Personality and Social Psychology PMC4109320 19634974
  17. Murray SL Holmes JG Collins NL 2006 Optimizing assurance: The risk regulation system in relationships Psychological Bulletin 132 641 666 16910746
  18. Murray SL Holmes JG Griffin D 1996a The benefits of positive illusions: Idealization and the construction of satisfaction in close relationships Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 79 98
  19. Murray SL Holmes JG Griffin DW 1996b The self-fulfilling nature of positive illusions in romantic relationship: Love is not blind, but prescient Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71 1155 1180 8979384
  20. Murray SL Holmes JG Griffin DW Bellavia G Rose P 2001 The mismeasure of love: How self-doubt contaminates relationship beliefs Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27 423 436
  21. Murray SL Rose P Bellavia G Holmes J Kusche A 2002 When rejection stings: How self-esteem constrains relationship-enhancement processes Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83 556 573 12219854
  22. Murray SL Rose P Holmes JG Derrick J Podchaski E Bellavia G Griffin DW 2005 Putting the partner within reach: A dyadic perspective on felt security in close relationships Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88 327 347 15841862
  23. Rosenberg M 1965 Society and the adolescent self-image Princeton, NJ Princeton University Press
  24. Rusbult C 1983 A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45 172 186
  25. Taylor SE Brown JD 1988 Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health Psychological Bulletin 103 193 210 3283814
  26. Thibaut JW Kelley HH 1959 The social psychology of groups New York Wiley
  27. Tooby J Cosmides L 1996 Friendship and the banker’s paradox: Other pathways to the evolution of adaptations for altruism Proceedings of the British Academy 88 119 143
  28. White GL 1980 Physical attractiveness and courtship progress Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39 660 668
  29. Williams KD Sommer KL 1997 Social ostracism by coworkers: Does rejection lead to loafing or compensation? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23 693 706

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Murray, S. L., Leder, S., MacGregor, J. C. D., Holmes, J. G., Pinkus, R. T., & Harris, B.
Affiliations
  • University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
Corresponding author
Murray, Sandra L.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-11
Volume
45
Issue
6
Pages
1180-1191
ISSN
0022-1031 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jesp.2009.07.001
PMC
PMC2783625
OpenAlex
W2050109217
Cited by
39
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
3.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH 60105-02)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
irreplaceability, self-esteem, romantic relationships, trust in relationships, compensatory behavior, relationship commitment, dating couples, indispensability

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review