Daily Support Equity in Romantic Couples: Response Surface Analyses of Monadic and Dyadic Data

Eran Bar-Kalifa, Rony Pshedetzky-Shochat, Eshkol Rafaeli, Marci E.J. Gleason

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

12 Scopus citations


Receiving support may yield negative outcomes, although these can be offset by reciprocating support. Here, we argue that support receipt and reciprocation should be considered with reference to two separate needs, for relatedness/communion and competence/agency, which underlie differential effects of equity on affective versus relational outcomes. To test these, we go beyond earlier studies by (a) examining equity along a (daily) continuum, (b) using the novel analytic approach of polynomial regression with response surface analyses, and (c) indexing equity from both monadic and dyadic perspectives. Using dyadic daily diaries (NDays = 35, NCouples = 80), we found personal outcomes (positive affect [PA] and negative affect [NA]) to be worst on inequitable days, particularly overbenefit ones. In contrast, equity did not play the same role with regard to relational outcomes (closeness/satisfaction), for which overbenefit proved more positive. Interestingly, the monadic and dyadic perspectives converged more with personal than with relational outcomes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)790-801
Number of pages12
JournalSocial Psychological and Personality Science
Issue number7
StatePublished - 1 Sep 2018

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This project was supported by the United States–Israel Binational Science Foundation (Grant number BSF #2013324).

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2017.


  • close relationships
  • daily diaries
  • equity
  • reciprocity
  • response-surface analyses


Dive into the research topics of 'Daily Support Equity in Romantic Couples: Response Surface Analyses of Monadic and Dyadic Data'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this