The communicative responses to jealousy scale: Revision, empirical validation, and associations with relational satisfaction

Laura Guerrero, Annegret F. Hannawa, Elizabeth A. Babin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

27 Scopus citations

Abstract

Two studies are utilized to test a revised version of Guerrero, Andersen, Eloy, Spitzberg, and Jorgensen's (1995) communicative responses to jealousy (CRJ) scale and examine how measures from the CRJ associate with relational satisfaction. Study 1 uses exploratory factor analysis to identify a preliminary factor structure. Study 2 uses confirmatory factor analysis to determine whether this factor structure holds across a second sample, as well as structural equation modeling to test hypotheses regarding the associations between communicative responses to jealousy and relational satisfaction. These studies suggest that there are 11 specific communicative responses to jealousy that fall under four superordinate categories: (a) destructive communication, which consists of negative communication, counter-jealousy induction, and violence; (b) constructive communication, which includes integrative communication and compensatory restoration; (c) avoidance, which comprises silence and denial; and (d) rival-focused communication, which includes signs of possession, surveillance, rival contacts, and derogation of the rival. Destructive communication and, to a lesser extent, rival-focused communication associated negatively with relational satisfaction, whereas constructive communication associated positively. Recommendations for using the CRJ scale in future studies are provided.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)223-249
Number of pages27
JournalCommunication Methods and Measures
Volume5
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2011

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The communicative responses to jealousy scale: Revision, empirical validation, and associations with relational satisfaction'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this