Two studies tested the assumption that relational contexts affect the way people react to messages that hurt their feelings. In the first, the range of responses people have to hurtful messages was explored, and underlying dimensions reflecting the responses were identified. Participants’ reactions were characterized by three broad dimensions: active verbal responses (e.g., attacking the other, defending the self, asking for an explanation), acquiescent responses (e.g., crying, apologizing), and invulnerable responses (e.g., ignoring the message, laughing). Analyses indicated that people who felt extremely hurt tended to react more often by acquiescing than those who were less hurt. Abo, those who felt the impact of hurt on their relationship was relatively low responded more often with invulnerability than those who felt the impact was high. In the second study, the association between people's reactions to hurt and the quality of their relationship with the person who hurt them was examined, as was the influence of particular types of relationships (e.g., those between family members or romantic partners) on individuab’ responses to hurt. Among other findings, the results suggested that relational satisfaction was positively associated with active verbal responses and negatively correlated both with the degree of experienced hurt and the perceived impact of the hurtful message on the relationship. Further, hurtful messages from family members tended to elicit greater feelings of hurt than those from other people—regardless of the closeness, similarity, amount of contact, or level of satisfaction reported by respondents. By comparison, messages from romantic partners had a greater effect on participants’ relationships than did those from individuab involved in family or non‐family/non‐romantic relationships.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 126 citations exist upstream.