The Communicative Responses to Jealousy Scale: Revision, Empirical Validation, and Associations with Relational Satisfaction

Abstract

Two studies are utilized to test a revised version of Guerrero, Andersen, Eloy, Spitzberg, and Jorgensen's (1995 Guerrero, L. K., Andersen, P. A., Jorgensen, P. F., Spitzberg, B. H. and Eloy, S. V. 1995. Coping with the green-eyed monster: Conceptualizing and measuring communicative responses to romantic jealousy. Western Journal of Communication, 59: 270–304. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) 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.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 42 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.