Fall 2025 — “The Science of Social Relationships”

Richard Gonzalez and Brenda Volling will touch base on RCGD business and introduce the fall 2025 series at this kick-off event.

Despite decades of research, relationship scientists have yet to fully unpack the mysteries of dating and compatibility. We still cannot robustly predict the formation and dissolution of any given romantic relationship. Furthermore, the researchers who study attraction and initial dating tend to have little overlap with those who study the maintenance of established relationships, leaving many unanswered questions about trajectories of relationships over time. In this talk, Amie Gordon will discuss how relationship science can leverage modern technology to gather large-scale data on the formation, maintenance, and dissolution of romantic relationships. One project leverages dating apps—the most common way for couples to meet today—to gain new insights into relationship formation. In collaboration with Elizabeth Bruch, a U-M sociologist, her lab has spent the past two years developing Revel, a dating app designed for science, not profit. A second project uses intensive longitudinal methods to track moment-to-moment relationship experiences with the goal of better understanding the dynamic patterns of change in relationship quality and stability over time. This talk showcases how technological advances provide creative opportunities to track the full lifecycle of relationships at an unprecedented scale and shed new light on the dynamics of relationships from beginning to end.

Amie M. Gordon is an associate professor of social psychology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor where she directs the Well-being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationships Lab (WHIRLab). Her research uses a multimethod approach to understand the affective, social cognitive, and biological factors that shape our closest relationships. She is particularly interested in how relationship partners influence each other in the moment and over time. A main goal of her research is to better understand how people can maintain high-quality relationships. Her research is driven by the belief that our interpersonal relationships underscore every aspect of our lives, influencing the health and well-being of individuals, families, groups, and organizations. Dr. Gordon received her PhD in Social-Personality Psychology from UC Berkeley and her BA in Psychology from UCLA. Prior to beginning her position at the University of Michigan, she completed postdoctoral fellowships at UC Berkeley and UCSF, as well as a research scientist position at UCSF.

Social connection is as necessary as food, water, shelter. Friend connections have positive impacts on health, happiness, and economic mobility. Friends can also buffer people against the high individual and societal costs of loneliness. But, in part because social psychology, relationship science, and evolutionary behavioral work have prioritized romantic and kin relationships, we know less about how friendship works among adults. My research aims to redress this gap by uncovering the design of friendship psychology. I begin from the premise that having friends—and enjoying the related benefits—requires people to solve multiple, likely recurrent challenges (e.g., finding, making, keeping friends). I also introduce the ‘embedded dyad framework’, which improves our ability to describe what these challenges look like: Just as better describing the shape of a lock allows us to generate better-informed predictions about the design of its key, better describing the shapes of friendship challenges allows us to generate better-informed predictions about how people solve them—or, really, the cognitive design of the tools that people use to solve them. In particular, this framework increases our descriptive power by providing a more ecologically-valid view of the social relationship landscape—one emphasizing that dyads, the typical focus of relationships work, exist embedded in wider, often densely interconnected networks. Therein, one’s dyadic partners—here, friends—frequently interact with other people, and these friend-other interactions can influence one’s friends, friendships, and outcomes. Thus, friendship challenges are likely to possess not only well-studied dyadic components (e.g., getting friends to like us), but also comparatively overlooked supra-dyadic ones (e.g., getting friends to like us more than they like their other friends). I discuss how this knowledge affects three key friendship challenges: finding, making, and maintaining friends, and I introduce implications for understanding the growth of friendlessness. 

Co-rumination is a social emotion regulation strategy characterized by extensive and exhaustive discussions of stressors and negative emotions with another person. Typically, greater co-rumination is associated with more intrapersonal costs (e.g., negative affect) and interpersonal benefits (e.g., closeness), indicative of what is known as the “trade-off hypothesis.” While research establishing the costs and benefits associated with co-rumination has been formative, our understanding of co-rumination can be enhanced by embracing its dyadic and social nature. Through a social psychological lens, our team paves a way forward by offering a new theoretical conceptualization with which to view co-rumination that emphasizes the need to explicitly examine the dyadic and social nature of co-rumination and to reconsider what are “costs” and “benefits” of co-rumination based on the social context in which it is embedded. I will review how our research team got to these theoretical points by discussing findings from 7 studies and 1,511 individuals. After, I will outline our future directions using this theoretical reconceptualization of co-rumination. We hope this work may help us to better understand difficult and upsetting conversations with close others, ultimately improving recommendations for how individuals seek and provide support through challenging times.

This talk will review several studies on hormone and brain changes across the transition to parenthood in first-time human fathers. Darby Saxbe et al find that men show cortical volume decreases that are similar to those seen in mothers, but are less significant and more variable. They also show that when men express more motivation to parent, and more engagement in parenting, they show larger gray matter volume decreases. At the same time, gray matter volume decreases are associated with more postpartum mental health problems and poor sleep quality. The talk will also describe research on perinatal resting state connectivity and white matter changes in men, and functional studies on men reacting to infant stimuli and emotional faces.

Darby Saxbe, PhD, is Professor of Psychology at the University of Southern California, where she serves as the current Director of Clinical Training for the Clinical Science program. She has published over eighty scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals, and her research has been funded by major awards from both NIH and NSF. She has earned early career recognition from the American Psychological Association and the Society for Research in Child Development and was a Fulbright fellow to Spain in 2019. 

There are vast individual differences in the ways in which people relate to significant others in their lives. Some people, for example, are relatively secure in their relationships: They are comfortable opening up to others and having others depend on them. Other people, in contrast, are insecure: They are uncomfortable depending on others and worry that others will not be available when needed. Social and personality psychologists refer to these kinds of individual differences as "attachment styles." In this talk I will review research on why some people are more secure than others. Specifically, I'll discuss five conclusions that have emerged from research over the past two decades. In addition, I will discuss some of the challenges and opportunities involved in changing people's attachment styles.

R. Chris Fraley is a Professor at the University of Illinois's Department of Psychology. He received his PhD from the University of California, Davis in 1999 in Social-Personality Psychology. In 2007 he received the American Psychological Association's Distinguished Scientific Award for Early Career Contribution to Psychology in the area of Individual Differences. In 2025 he received the Carol and Ed Diener Mid-Career Award from the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. He has served as an Associate Editor at the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

Chris's research involves the study of attachment processes in close relationships, personality dynamics and development, and research methods (with an emphasis on open science and dynamic modeling). The majority of his research is focused on understanding why some people are more secure than others in their close relationships, the implications of attachment (in)security for psychological well-being and relationship functioning, and how attachment patterns change over time.

Over decades, parenting researchers have successfully conceptualized and empirically documented the various forms of caregiving along with their etiological roots and implications for child development outcomes.  However, much of this work has relied on top-down approaches that define and distinguish socialization and caregiving constructs based largely or solely on their physical form, and by extension, primarily categorizing parenting into ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ behavioral dichotomies. The result of this is a lack of precision or specificity in determinants and sequelae. As a field, we have still not successfully addressed limitations identified 20 years ago by Collins (2005): “Perhaps most important for future research, the present framework is a timely reminder of the importance of moving beyond global associations toward divergent predictions, thus avoiding the frequent, but only somewhat informative, conclusion that good things go together and bad things go together (p. 144).” Behavioral systems models can address this gap by more precisely identifying parental socialization goals and the behavioral strategies for achieving those goals within specific child-rearing contexts.  This talk will present how “form (what it looks like)” and “function (what it is designed to do)” in behavioral systems conceptualizations of caregiving can provide greater specificity in parenting behaviors with children. Moreover, the talk will discuss observational approaches to assessing different caregiving domains, mothers' and fathers' caregiving, and the pitfalls and promises of this approach.

Compared to White Americans, Black Americans have poorer relationship outcomes including being among the least likely to marry, having poorer quality relationships, and being the least likely to stay married. These racial inequities in relationship outcomes have been attributed, in part, to racism which “defines, structures, reinforces, and constrains romantic relationships” (Landor & McNeil Smith, 2023, p. 7). The Integrative Model for the Study of Stress in Black Families (Murry et al., 2018) frames racism and the inequities that it produces as stressors for Black family relationships. Importantly, romantic relationships can be a source of strength and resilience for Black Americans as they navigate shared experiences of racism-related stress, including persistent discrepancies in access to resources that undergird racial inequities, together. Black families’ existence and historical persistence in the face of racism suggests that individuals have consciously and unconsciously adapted behaviors and cognitions that can mitigate the adverse effects of racism. Importantly, racism and racism-related stress is multidimensional its effects can be complicated by other intersecting oppressions (e.g., cis-sexism, heterosexism, classism).

In this talk, Dr. TeKisha Rice Wallace will present published and ongoing work form her research on associations between racism-related stress, individual wellbeing, and relationship functioning among partnered Black Americans. In addition, the talk will discuss how a macro-contextual stressor such as racism-related stress can be experienced as a relational stressor. The talk will conclude by reviewing the implications, limitations, and future directions for this field of research.

Dr. TeKisha Rice Wallace (she/her) is an Assistant Professor of Human Development and Family Science at Virginia Tech where she directs the Relationship Experiences: Strengths and Strains (REST) Lab. Using quantitative and qualitative methods, her research examines the complex associations between social stressors, individual wellbeing, and relationship dynamics. Her research is driven by the belief that all people deserve to live long lives full of joy and authentic relationships that minimize the challenges of navigating inevitably hard times. Dr. Rice Wallace’s research has been recognized by the International Association for Relationship Research.

Scientists still cannot predict romantic compatibility at rates higher than chance. This mystery exists in both online dating contexts and offline first dates.

In this talk, Tatum Jolink presents a new theoretical framework for conceptualizing initial romantic interactions (i.e., online matches, first dates). Specifically, she draws upon the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat and propose that we may be able to progress the science of compatibility by considering early dating interactions as motivated performance situations. Based on the BPS model, she theorizse that when a dater’s available resources meet or exceed situational demands (i.e., challenge response) that might enhance perceived compatibility with a potential partner during an initial romantic interaction.

This talk presents preliminary data from three studies that test the framework’s core ideas. First, in two online correlational samples, 340 participants retrospectively recalled a recent first date experience; Jolink examines the association between recalled appraisals of demands and resources ahead of this first date and reported performance and perceived compatibility after the date. Then, Jolink rigorously and robustly tests this framework in the real world, using a dating app, Revel, built by relationship scientists for research purposes. In the first nine months of pilot testing, almost 1,000 participants made over 61,000 swipe decisions, which lead to over 850 matches and more than 11,000 messages. Ahead of joining Revel, participants reported their dating resources (i.e., confidence) and demands (i.e., perceived effort).

Jolink tests the hypothesis that those with challenge responses (resources>demands) will be more engaged and have greater dating success on Revel than those with threat responses (resources<demands). She explores how dating appraisals shape their dating behavior, including how often they swipe right (indicating liking), match, and chat with potential partners, as well as perceived compatibility with a match. Finally, she presents initial descriptive results (N=23) from an ongoing First Date Study, in which two people have an in-person first date in our lab. This new theoretical framework has the potential to be generative for the field of relationship initiation and yield new insights into what makes two people romantically compatible.

Close friendships are essential for well-being and are often built on shared interests, identities, or experiences. But interacting with new and diverse social partners also offers benefits, like novelty, a sense of belonging, and future friendship. A healthy social network therefore balances social exploitation (investing in familiar relationships) and social exploration (interacting with strangers and embracing differences). In this talk, I first present survey and experience sampling data that suggests preferences for spending time with friends versus acquaintances predict distinct patterns in well-being and social network structure. Despite its benefits, social exploration comes with challenges: it can be harder to connect and or find common ground with dissimilar others. Drawing on sociocentric network data, I show that successful exploration hinges not just on who we meet, but how we perceive them: perceived similarity, more than actual similarity, predicts outcomes like belonging and even shared laughter. These findings suggest that the explore-exploit tradeoff in social life is not just about who we spend time with, but how we bridge the unfamiliar into the familiar.

In the media and popular culture, testosterone is often depicted as a hormone that is critical for seemingly “masculine” behaviors, such as competition, sexual prowess, and physical strength. Based on such characterizations, one might assume that testosterone only matters for men, and that, at least for men, the more testosterone the better. In actuality, however, the story is more complicated: First, testosterone is important for both men and women. Second, although there are certainly many benefits of high(er) testosterone, including for attracting and securing sexual partners, lower testosterone may in fact be more beneficial for maintaining close relationships—including with romantic partners and children. In this talk, Robin Edelstein will present work from her lab on testosterone and relationship processes in romantic and parent-child relationships. Taken together, this work demonstrates that (a) in both men and women, testosterone declines as a function of partnering and parenting, (b) lower testosterone facilitates ongoing nurturant relationship processes, and (c) testosterone matters not only for one’s own relationship outcomes but also those of one’s partner.

Dr. Robin Edelstein is a social/personality psychologist with expertise in close relationships, parent-infant and adult romantic attachment, and social neuroendocrinology. Her work is motivated by a desire to understand how important emotional and interpersonal processes, which are typically assumed to apply to all people, may instead differ across people in meaningful ways. Dr. Edelstein is particularly interested in understanding how close relationship experiences (e.g., interactions with romantic partners, major relationship transitions) get “under the skin” to influence people’s physiology, as well as how people’s physiology can influence their relationship outcomes. She also studies individual differences in people’s approaches to and experiences in close relationships; how these differences develop and change over time and across the lifespan; and the implications of these differences for interpersonal and physiological outcomes. Dr. Edelstein received her Ph.D. in Social/Personality Psychology from the University of California, Davis. After a postdoctoral fellowship at the University of California, Irvine, she joined the faculty at the University of Michigan, where she is currently a Professor of Psychology in the Personality and Social Contexts area. 

Nearly one-third of older adults (age 65+) in the United States are aging alone (NASEM, 2020). Approximately 60% of older adults who are living alone report experiencing social isolation and feelings of loneliness (NASEM, 2020) due to a lack of social interaction. As quality and satisfaction of social relationships has been shown to be one of the best predictors of cognitive health, well-being, and overall life expectancy, there is a need to develop innovative approaches to leverage and optimize the social networks for older adults living alone.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic Virtual reality (VR) interventions are gaining traction among researchers as VR use has been shown to promote social connection and interaction and has been associated with benefits to mental health, physical health and cognitive health (dual tasking, visual attention, and memory). Although historically, VR technology has been relatively cumbersome, expensive, and marketed towards a niche and young audience, recent innovations in the field have made VR considerably more accessible to individuals across demographics. These advances in VR technology have created more opportunity for more individuals to see potential benefit from its use, however research to this point is in its infancy. 

This talk will address considerations for VR adoption and engagement among older adults for the purpose of social interaction. We will also explore the effect that such emerging technologies as VR have on overall well-being for older adults and discuss implications for technology and intervention design.

Dr. Jess Francis-Levin (she, her, hers) is a gerontechnologist and mixed-methodologist. Her work examines how emerging technology use, such as virtual reality, may impact the overall health and well-being of the older adult community. With an emphasis on social connectivity, Dr. Francis-Levin develops technological interventions designed to promote independence and mitigate the negative consequences of social isolation. A primary consideration for her research is how the digital divide may impact individuals from realizing the true benefits of emerging technologies, and how to bridge that gap.

Intimate relationships play a critical role in shaping mental and physical health across the lifespan. However, LGBTQ+ couples and families face unique stressors rooted in stigma, discrimination, and systemic inequities. In this talk, I will present a programmatic line of research that integrates dyadic and longitudinal methods to understand how minority stress intersects with core relationship processes (e.g., communication, stability). Drawing from studies of same-gender couples, transgender and nonbinary partners, and sexual minority women of color, I will highlight findings from actor–partner interdependence models (APIM) that demonstrate both within-person and cross-partner effects of minority stress on relational outcomes. I will then describe the systematic approach my team has taken to intervention development, including community-engaged qualitative work, quantitative modeling of dyadic processes, and the creation and testing of culturally informed relationship education programs. Collectively, these studies underscore the importance of moving beyond deficit-based models to highlight both the vulnerabilities and cultural strengths of LGBTQ+ families, with the goal of dismantling systemic barriers and advancing health equity. The talk will conclude by outlining ongoing and future directions, including intervention refinement for transgender and nonbinary populations, the development of minority stress prevention programs for LGBTQ+ youth, and frameworks for supporting queer parents. 

Shelby B. Scott, Ph.D. (she/her), is an Assistant Professor of Clinical Psychology at the University of Texas at San Antonio and Director of the Promoting Resilience in DiversE Family (PRIDE) Studies Lab. Her research examines how minority stress shapes the relational and health outcomes of LGBTQ+ couples and families, with a focus on same-gender couples, transgender and nonbinary populations, and sexual minority women of color. Using dyadic and longitudinal methodologies, Dr. Scott’s work evaluates both universal and culturally specific relationship processes, aiming to identify pathways that foster resilience and well-being. She has led intervention development efforts, including relationship education programs for female same-gender couples and developed clinical guidelines for working with same-gender couples. Her research has been supported by the American Psychological Foundation, the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, and the Association of American Medical Colleges. Dr. Scott is deeply committed to community-engaged scholarship, dismantling systemic barriers to culturally responsive care, and training the next generation of equity-focused researchers and clinicians.

This event will be an in-person watch party, with the speaker streaming in.

How do romantic partners influence each other's well-being? Why do some parent-infant pairings lead to secure attachment?  Why do some therapist-client pairs achieve breakthrough results while others struggle? What makes some collaborations spark innovation? These questions share a fundamental challenge: the people involved are interdependent so their outcomes are inherently intertwined. Relationship science seeks to explain how people shape one another’s thoughts, feelings, and behavior over time.

For decades, this interdependence was viewed as a statistical headache, violating the independence assumptions of standard analyses. In this talk, I'll demonstrate that interdependence isn't a nuissance but the very phenomenon that should be addressed.

Using the intraclass correlation as our starting point, I'll review practical approaches for quantifying and interpreting interdependence in dyadic data. We'll explore how different dyadic models reveal distinct relationship dynamics, connecting statistical insights to foundational theories like Kelley and Thibaut's interdependence framework. Through examples, you'll see how these methods illuminate patterns that traditional analyses might miss.

With Brenda Volling.