1 of 1

Tannoz Norouzi¹, Dr. Lisa Welling²

1. BS, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine
2. PhD, Department of Psychology, Professor of Psychology at Oakland University

​

Exploring the Interplay Between Online and Offline Mate Retention, Personality, and Intimate Partner Violence

Exploring the Interplay Between Online and Offline Mate Retention, Personality, and Intimate Partner Violence

Exploring the Interplay Between Online and Offline Mate Retention, Personality, and Intimate Partner Violence

Mate Retention in the Digital Age: Social Media Behaviors, Personality, and Relationship Dynamics

Mate retention behaviors are actions used to maintain a romantic partner and prevent relationship dissolution.

• These behaviors can be categorized as benefit-provisioning (e.g., affection, support) or cost-inflicting (e.g., jealousy, control).

Prior research shows that:

• Benefit-provisioning behaviors are associated with higher relationship satisfaction.¹
• Cost-inflicting behaviors are linked to lower satisfaction and relationship harm.²

Certain mate retention tactics, such as jealousy, surveillance, and time monopolization, have also been associated with relationship aggression and intimate partner violence (IPV).³

Social media has transformed romantic relationships, creating new opportunities for:

• Monitoring a partner’s activity
• Signaling possession
• Publicly displaying affection

Despite this shift, most research has focused on offline behaviors, with limited attention to online or social media-based mate retention. This study examines how online mate retention behaviors relate to personality, relationship satisfaction, and IPV, addressing a growing gap in understanding modern relationships.

​

Introduction

Aims and Objectives

• Examine relationships between relationship satisfaction and benefit provisioning versus cost inflicting behaviors (offline mate retention behaviors; see Table 1).
• Identify whether online mate retention tactics are associated with specific personality traits (see Table 2).
• Determine how specific personality traits impact relationship satisfaction (see Table 2).
• Examine how personality traits predict engagement in online mate retention behaviors (see Table 3).
• Examine how personality traits differentially predict benefit-provisioning and cost-inflicting (offline) mate retention behaviors (see Table 4).
• Evaluate whether cost-inflicting mate retention behaviors predict the frequency of relationship aggression (see Table 5).

​

​

Measures

• Personality: HEXACO-60 measuring six personality traits using a 1–5 Likert scale (α = .73–.80).⁴�
• Relationship Satisfaction: Relationship Assessment Scale (7 items; 1–5 Likert scale; α = .86).⁵

​

• Online Mate Retention: Modified Facebook Mate Retention Tactic Inventory assessing social-media behaviors (40 items; 0–3 scale).⁶�
• Offline Mate Retention: Mate Retention Inventory–Short Form (38 items; 0–3 scale) measuring benefit-provisioning and cost-inflicting tactics.⁷�
• Relationship Aggression: Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (20 items; 0–6 frequency scale).⁸�
• Intimate Partner Violence: Composite Abuse Scale–Revised Short Form (15 items assessing abuse experiences).⁹

Analysis�Multiple regression analyses examined associations between personality, online/offline mate retention behaviors, relationship satisfaction, and IPV.

​

Methods

Type in or paste your text here

Results

References

1. Holden CJ, Shackelford TK, Zeigler-Hill V, et al. Husband's esteem predicts his mate retention tactics. Evol Psychol. 2014;12(3):655-672. doi:10.1177/147470491401200311
2. Miner EJ, Shackelford TK, and Starratt VG. Mate value of romantic partners predicts men’s partner-directed verbal insults. Personality and Individual Differences. 2009;46:135-139. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.09.015
3. Yakubovich AR, Stöckl H, Murray J, et al. Risk and Protective Factors for Intimate Partner Violence Against Women: Systematic Review and Meta-analyses of Prospective-Longitudinal Studies. Am J Public Health. 2018;108(7):e1-e11. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2018.304428
4. Ashton MC, Lee K. The HEXACO-60: a short measure of the major dimensions of personality. J Pers Assess. 2009;91(4):340-345. doi:10.1080/00223890902935878
5. Hendrick SS. A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1988;50(1):93–98. doi:10.2307/352430
6. Brem MJ, Spiller LC, Vandehey MA. Online Mate-Retention Tactics on Facebook Are Associated With Relationship Aggression. J Interpers Violence. 2015;30(16):2831-2850. doi:10.1177/0886260514554286
7. Buss DM, Shackelford TK. From vigilance to violence: mate retention tactics in married couples. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997;72(2):346-361. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.72.2.346
8. Straus MA, Douglas EM. A short form of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales, and typologies for severity and mutuality. Violence and Victims. 2004;19(5):507-520.
9. Ford-Gilboe M, Wathen C, Varcoe C, et al. Development of a brief measure of intimate partner violence experiences: the Composite Abuse Scale (Revised)–Short Form (CASR-SF). BMJ Open. 2016;6.

Acknowledgements

Thank you Dr. Welling for her support and mentorship through the entirety of the project. Thank you Jacob Keeley for his help in the statistical analysis of the data.

Table 5. Cost-inflicting behavior was positively associated with abuse frequency.

​

Conclusions

Table 2. Spearman’s correlations revealed higher online mate retention was associated with greater cost-inflicting and benefit-provisioning behaviors, and lower Honesty–Humility and Conscientiousness. Relationship satisfaction was negatively associated with jealousy and possessiveness using the HEXACO-60 model.

Table 3. Multiple regression models predicting likelihood of online mate retention behaviors from personality traits. Lower Honesty–Humility and Conscientiousness, and higher Emotionality, predicted greater online mate retention.

Table 4. Benefit provisioning was predicted by higher Emotionality and Agreeableness and lower Honesty–Humility. Cost-inflicting behavior was predicted by lower Honesty–Humility, Conscientiousness, and Openness.

Table 1. Relationship satisfaction was positively associated with benefit provisioning and negatively associated with cost-inflicting behavior.

​

Cost-inflicting behavior consistently predicted adverse relationship outcomes, including lower relationship satisfaction and higher abuse frequency.

Benefit provisioning was positively associated with relationship satisfaction, but did not predict abuse outcomes.

Personality traits played a key role in relationship behaviors:

• Lower Honesty–Humility and Conscientiousness were associated with greater cost-inflicting and mate retention behaviors.
• Higher Emotionality and Agreeableness were associated with greater benefit provisioning.

No reliable sex differences or moderation effects were observed.

​

​

Participants & Procedure�Adults (18.06 + SD +/- 0.2) currently in a romantic relationship for ≥3 months were recruited through Oakland University’s Psychology Subject Pool. Participants (N=451) completed an anonymous online survey via Qualtrics, where questionnaires were presented in random order to reduce response bias.

​

Demographics