Timothy W. Smith

The Displaced Aggression Questionnaire (DAQ) assesses the trait tendency to aggress against innocent targets, following unrelated provocation. In a primary aim, interpersonal concepts and methods and other measures were used to evaluate the construct validity of DAQ subscales (i.e., angry rumination, revenge planning, behavioral displaced aggression). A second aim evaluated the extent to which partialing altered interpersonal and other correlates of the DAQ subscales. A representative online sample of 999 U.S. adults completed the DAQ, interpersonal circumplex measures of trait social behavior and problems, agentic and communal values, negative interpersonal experiences, social support, loneliness, and subjective social status, as well as measures of self-regulatory processes. In Structural Summary Method analyses, DAQ subscales had expected associations with hostile interpersonal style and more severe interpersonal problems. Additional correlations with interpersonal processes and self-regulation generally supported predictions. However, partialing DAQ subscales from each other severely undermined this otherwise supportive evidence of construct validity.

Multiple psychosocial factors can influence any given health outcome. To establish independent effects, partialing correlated risk or protective factors (e.g., simultaneous inclusion in regressions) is a common strategy. However, partialing can alter construct validity for even well-established measures. The present studies used the interpersonal circumplex (IPC) and elements of the five-factor model as frameworks to evaluate this issue. In Study 1, a representative sample of 1,356 U.S. adults completed measures of social anxiety, social support, and interpersonal problems. In Study 2, 300 middle-aged and older couples (total n = 600) completed measures of martial adjustment, depression, anger/hostility, and optimism, as well as IPC-based measures of the spouses' typical behavior during couple interactions and interpersonal style (i.e., trait social behavior), additional measures of marital support and conflict, and facets of the five-factor-model neuroticism domain. The (dis)similarity of associations of unadjusted and partialed variables with the external variables indicative of construct validity was evaluated in structural summary model analyses of IPC correlates and in comparisons of correlations with the additional measures. The primary effect of partialing was a significant reduction in the magnitude of expected associations with external variables in the nomological network, suggesting weaker representation of intended constructs. In some cases, partialing also produced a shift in the constructs assessed by partialed scores. Partialing can alter the validity of psychosocial measures. Implications for designing, reporting, and interpreting analyses of psychosocial risk and protective factors are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Statistical adjustments (i.e., partialing) for between-partner correlations on the same variable and for correlations among multiple predictors within individuals are common in relationship research. Although useful, partialing can alter the construct validity or meaning of measured variables in ways that are typically not considered. In this study of 300 middle-aged and older couples, unadjusted, partner-partialed, partialed warmth and hostility component, and common fate model scores for observer-rated behavior during marital conflict discussions were compared using interpersonal circumplex-based spouse ratings of targets' behavior during those discussions, as well as self-reports of marital quality (i.e., overall marital adjustment, support from spouse, conflict). Unadjusted scores for observer-rated affiliation-and its two components, warmth, and hostility-had expected associations with interpersonal circumplex-based spouse ratings and self-reports of marital quality. Compared to unadjusted scores, partner-partialing, analogous to the actor-partner interdependence model, resulted in significantly weaker associations of behavioral scores with the expected interpersonal content of spouse ratings, and weaker associations with reported marital quality. Partialing of warmth and hostility within individuals also resulted in weaker associations with spouse ratings and marital quality, and some shifts in the theme of spouse ratings. In contrast, common fate model scores had expected associations with these criteria that equaled or exceeded the magnitude for unadjusted scores. Thus, common forms of partialing in relationship research can weaken the construct validity of behavioral observation variables, and common fate model scores represent a viable alternative in some instances. Implications for the design, reporting, and evaluation of couple research are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: Social media use can promote social connection but also often includes negative experiences, raising questions about its associations with broader interpersonal functioning. Methods: This preregistered study used the interpersonal circumplex (IPC) to examine associations of self‐reported online social support and negativity, and excessive social media use with self‐reports of general interpersonal problems, compared to associations for offline support and social anxiety, in a representative sample of U.S. adult social media users ( n = 1356; mean age = 44.9; 52% women; 61.9% non‐Hispanic White; median income $50k–75k). Results: Online negativity and excessive social media use were strongly associated with more severe general interpersonal problems; online support had a small positive association with greater problems. These associations were stronger for men than women, and weaker for older participants. In contrast to online support, off‐line social support was inversely associated with interpersonal problems, and the positive association for social anxiety was similar in magnitude to those for online negativity and excessive social media use. Conclusions: Findings suggest that online social experiences and excessive social media use are associated with broader interpersonal difficulties, and that the interpersonal perspective may be useful in understanding psychosocial issues emerging in the digital age.

This article synthesizes how we think about groups and how we behave during interpersonal situations by integrating the influential stereotype content model from social psychology and the interpersonal perspective in personality and clinical psychology. The empirically derived structural model of the interpersonal circumplex closely resembles the stereotype content model in its general form and specific dimensions. Integration allows researchers to hypothesize and test precise mechanisms linking stereotypes and interpersonal interactions using the common metaconcepts of agency and communion to link cognitions (stereotypes) and behavior. The interpersonal perspective has also been studied extensively, and repeated patterns of interaction have been linked to mental and physical health. Thus, this integration also has the potential to inform our mechanistic understanding of associations between stereotypes and outcomes and thus inform interventions intended to reduce stereotyping and its harmful effects. Integration with the stereotype content model also extends the interpersonal perspective by highlighting the importance of stereotypes as a repetitive influence on interpersonal interactions, similar to interpersonal conceptualizations of personality. This integration of the stereotype content model and the interpersonal tradition helps create a holistic view of the influence of stereotypes during interpersonal situations and explain why benefits or risks may follow.

Partialing correlated predictors to test independent effects is an essential tool in couple research. In actor-partner models, partners' parallel scores are partialed in tests of unique associations with outcomes. Correlated aspects of couple functioning are also often partialed within individuals to examine separate effects. Partialed versions of measures are typically interpreted as assessing the same construct as original unadjusted variables, but in fact their meaning can change. Extending a prior report on changes in construct validity resulting from partialing partners' parallel scores, the present analyses examined effects of partialing measures of positive and negative relationship variables within individuals, specifically perceived support from the partner and relationship conflict. In 300 middle-aged and older couples, we utilized participants' interpersonal circumplex ratings of their partner's typical behavior during marital interactions to compare interpersonal correlates of unadjusted and within-person partialed forms of the Quality of Relationships Inventory Support and Conflict scales. Compared to unadjusted scores, partialed support scores (i.e., adjusted for conflict) were substantially less closely associated with ratings of partner's warmth, and were associated with a less submissive (i.e., less agreeable, cooperative) form of warmth. Compared to unadjusted scores, partialed conflict scores (i.e., adjusted for support) were substantially less closely correlated with ratings of the partner's hostility, and were associated with a more controlling (i.e., critical, coercive) form of hostility. Results were nearly identical for wives and husbands. Partialing correlated scores within individuals can alter the construct validity of relationship measures, suggesting the need for careful reporting and interpretation in couple research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

In research on couples, statistical adjustment (i.e., partialing) for correlations between partners' parallel scores is common and useful, as in the actor-partner interdependence model. Original and partialed scores are typically interpreted as assessing the same construct, but this may not be a valid assumption. Other approaches to nonindependence-such as common fate modeling-may better represent some couple constructs. This study of 300 couples utilized participants' interpersonal circumplex ratings of partners' typical behavior during marital interactions to evaluate the interpersonal meaning of unadjusted and partialed forms of the Marital Adjustment Test (MAT), a measure of overall relationship quality, and the Quality of Relationships Inventory-Support (QRI-S) and Conflict (QRI-C) scales, which measured perceived support from and conflict with the partner. After partialing partners' scores, MAT and QRI-S scores were substantially less closely associated with ratings of partners' warmth, their primary expected interpersonal correlates. Partner-partialed QRI-C scores were substantially less closely correlated with ratings of partners' hostility and were associated with a somewhat more controlling form of hostility. In contrast, partialing partners' trait optimism scores resulted in minimal changes in interpersonal correlates of this personality characteristic. Couple-level MAT, QRI-S, and QRI-C variables representing overlapping variance across partners while partialing unshared variance in spouses' scores (i.e., common fate scores) had highly similar interpersonal correlates when compared to unadjusted versions. Potential alterations in construct validity resulting from partialing partners' scores warrant interpretive caution, and alternative analytic frameworks (e.g., the common fate model) may better maintain the construct validity of some dyadic measures. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Purpose of Review Research and clinical services addressing psychosocial aspects of coronary heart disease (CHD) typically emphasize individuals, focusing less on the context of intimate relationships such as marriage and similar partnerships. This review describes current evidence regarding the role of intimate relationships in the development, course, and management of CHD. Recent Findings Having an intimate partner is associated with reduced risk of incident CHD and a better prognosis among patients, but strain (e.g., conflict) and disruption (i.e., separation, divorce) in these relationships are associated with increased risk and poor outcomes. These associations likely reflect mechanisms involving health behavior and the physiological effects of emotion and stress. Importantly, many other well-established psychosocial risk and protective factors (e.g., low SES, job stress, depression, and optimism) are strongly related to the quality of intimate relationships, and these associations likely contribute to the effects of those other psychosocial factors. For better or worse, intimate partners can also affect the outcome of efforts to alter health behaviors (physical activity, diet, smoking, and medication adherence) central in the prevention and management CHD. Intimate partners also influence—and are influenced by—stressful aspects of acute coronary crises and longer-term patient adjustment and management. Summary Evidence on each of these roles of intimate relationships in CHD is considerable, but direct demonstrations of the value of couple assessments and interventions are limited, although preliminary research is promising. Research needed to close this gap must also address issues of diversity, disparities, and inequity that have strong parallels in CHD and intimate relationships.