The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring the sources and content of relational uncertainty
Abstract
Uncertainty reduction theory suggests that the self, the partner, and the relationship constitute three sources of uncertainty within interpersonal relationships; however, existing operationaliza‐tions of uncertainty focus predominately on partner issues. More recent extensions of the uncertainty construct to developed relationships call for a measure that both captures the range of uncertainty as originally conceptualized and attends to the uncertainty issues relevant in ongoing associations. We conducted a study of individuals in dating relationships to develop a measure that assesses the sources and content of relational uncertainty. Results identified three content issues for uncertainty focused on either the self or the partner: desire for the relationship, evaluation of the relationship, and goals for the relationship. Uncertainty about the relationship encompassed four content issues: behavioral norms for the relationship, mutuality of feelings between the partners, current definition of the relationship, and future of the relationship. A second‐order factor analysis demonstrated that whereas uncertainty about self versus partner were empirically distinct, items assessing relationship uncertainty cross‐loaded on both the self and partner uncertainty factors. The discussion highlights how a more nuanced conceptualization of relational uncertainty can inform future investigations.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Advances In Experimental Social Psychology
(2022) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(22)x0002-6 · Cited by 22,259
Research in Organizational Behavior
Hammer, E. R., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1984) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258300 · Cited by 10,806
BERGER, C. R., & CALABRESE, R. J. (1975) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x · Cited by 3,006
(1973) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,836
Relating: Dialogues and Dialectics
Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996) · Cited by 1,116
Language and Social Psychology
Mercer, N. (1979) · Sociology · doi:10.1177/003803857901300333 · Cited by 1,102
Rogers, E. M., & Deetz, S. A. (1993) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2075811 · Cited by 1,067
Handbook of communication and emotion: research, theory, applications, and contexts
(1998) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-5367 · Cited by 706
(2018) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/(issn)1468-2958 · Cited by 668
Breakups Before Marriage: The End of 103 Affairs
Hill, C. T., Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1976) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1976.tb02485.x · Cited by 562
Cited by
More information than you ever wanted: Does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy?
Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0263 · Cited by 573
Solomon, D. H., & Knobloch, L. K. (2004) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/0265407504047838 · Cited by 353
Self-citationSolomon, D. H., Knobloch, L. K., Theiss, J. A., & McLaren, R. M. (2016) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/hcre.12091 · Cited by 286
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Knobloch, L. K., & Solomon, D. H.
- Venue
- Communication Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1999-12
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 261-278
- ISSN
- 1051-0974 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-1035
- OpenAlex
- W2039416432
- Cited by
- 416
- References
- 55
- FWCI
- 4.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Measuring the sources and content of relational uncertainty. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10510979909388499
- The paper
- Knobloch, L. K., & Solomon, D. H. (1999). Measuring the sources and content of relational uncertainty. Communication Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510979909388499
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.