Love - Chapter 8 PDF

34 Love Susan Hendrick & Clyde Hendrick Romantic love may not be essential to life, simply would not study a “soft” topic such as but it may be essential to joy. Life without love. Thus, the creation of a research discipline love would be for many people lik...

34 Love Susan Hendrick & Clyde Hendrick Romantic love may not be essential to life, simply would not study a “soft” topic such as but it may be essential to joy. Life without love. Thus, the creation of a research discipline love would be for many people like a black- for the study of love was not easy. It took cour- and-white movie—full of events and activities age for Berscheid and Walster (1969, 1978) to but without the color that gives it vibrancy introduce romantic love into the study of “in- and provides a sense of celebration. terpersonal attraction,” for Rubin (1970) to dis- S. Hendrick & Hendrick, 1992, p. 117 tinguish loving from liking, and for Harlow (1974) to extend the study of love to nonhuman species. In this quotation from the end of our book, Ro- These and other research pioneers in the mantic Love, we construe love as one of the study of love paved the way for today’s flour- most important defining qualities of life. In that ishing research on love within the larger disci- volume, we focused on romantic love, but the pline of relationship science (Berscheid, 2000). quotation could be extended to other types of Our goal is to convey some of the interest and love—the love of parents (and grandparents) for drama of this new discipline, which has been a newborn child, the love of siblings, the love developed by “scholars who have been attentive of best friends, and so on. What is more im- and responsive to societal concerns while at- portant than love for a happy human life? Our tempting, at the same time, to develop a unified answer is “nothing is more important,” and in and cohesive science in which an understanding this response we advocate love as being a cen- of process is awarded as much importance as are terpiece of a positive psychology. structure and outcomes” (Berscheid, 2000, In this chapter, we review briefly the progress p. xix). We begin with a historical overview of of the study of love over the past three decades. the meaning of love. We then consider current Only recently has love been a topic of study in scientific meanings (theories and models) and psychological research. Like the evening news, methods for measuring love. We provide a sam- psychology historically has been more con- ple of current research findings and suggest cerned with the bad and the ugly of human life some possible applications of this research. We than with the good and the beautiful. Tradi- conclude with some suggestions regarding fu- tionally, a respectable hard-nosed psychologist ture research. 472  CHAPTER 34. LOVE 473 History of Romantic Love by the view that when the passions die, so, too, do the marriages or intimate relationships. If A comprehensive history of love was written by the passion aspect of love is not sufficient to Irving Singer in three large volumes (1984a, bond partners in a relationship, perhaps the ad- 1984b, 1987). The Nature of Love is a philo- dition of other love components such as friend- sophical history of love from antiquity to the ship would strengthen the bond. If one could modern era. Very early, conceptual thought also be good friends, perhaps even best friends, about love was largely linked to abstract virtues with one’s passionate lover, then perhaps the (e.g., “the good”) or to gods. Singer discerned relationship could survive the turbulent com- four broad conceptual traditions: Eros (desire ings and goings of passion. for the good or the beautiful); Philia (friendship There is some evidence that the aforemen- love); Nomos (submission to a god’s will; in hu- tioned cultural change is under way. The old man terms, obedience to the desires of a loved adage that “you can’t be friends with the one one); and Agape (a divine bestowal of love upon you love” is no longer true. In fact, many creation). Over the centuries, various writers young couples now seek actively partners who worked with these disparate conceptions, at- are good companions as well as good lovers. Re- tempting to synthesize and translate them into lated to this point, in a study by S. Hendrick human terms. and Hendrick (1993), college students wrote es- Some have questioned whether romantic/pas- says about their romantic relationships or about sionate love even existed before the last two or their closest friendship. Not only was friendship three centuries; however, Hatfield (1988; Hat- the dominant theme in describing romantic re- field & Rapson, 1996) proposed that passionate lationships but almost half of the participants love, as an intense attraction, has existed in all spontaneously named their romantic partner as cultures and all historical periods and is essen- their closest friend. Consistent with these find- tially a “human universal.” Passionate love of ings, Sprecher and Regan (1998) found that and marriage to the same person, however, is a both companionate love and passionate love relatively recent cultural invention. Throughout were related to commitment and relationship much of human history, marriage for love was satisfaction. Friendship, along with passion, is unknown. As it developed during the Middle thus an important ingredient of love. Ages, courtly love involved a highly stylized Sexuality and marriage have typically been ritual and, as such, may have been a historical connected, but we believe that love, sex, mar- harbinger of change. Courtly love idealized the riage (or cohabitation), and friendship are in- love felt toward another person, a love of in- creasingly being linked in romantic relation- tense passion between a man and a woman who ships. This cohesion is a powerful “bundling” generally were not married to each other of four of the most positive facets of life. Today, (Singer, 1984b). people generally should find more joy in their Slowly, this notion of passionate love be- romantic relationships than was possible in pre- tween man and woman, within a courtship con- vious centuries. There is a price, however, in text, led to “love marriages,” often to the con- that the expectations of these relationships are sternation of those who held to traditional also much higher. norms. The growth of love marriages spread widely in the Western world in the 18th cen- tury. Detailed histories are available in many Models for Explaining Love sources (e.g., Gadlin, 1977; Murstein, 1974). The perceived link between love and marriage There are many perspectives on the study of still is undergoing dynamic change. Simpson, love. We provide a sketch of the most popular Campbell, and Berscheid (1986) examined col- approaches, with a sample of research findings lege students’ perceptions of the importance of to follow in later sections. Theories of love are love as a basis for marriage, in data collected disparate and difficult to classify. Nevertheless, over a 30-year period. Students over time re- they may be grouped under two broad headings: ported romantic love as being an increasingly naturalistic/biological and psychological/social. important basis for marriage. Students also Naturalistic approaches are rooted in the body, viewed remaining in love as necessary for con- in emotion, and in our evolutionary heritage— tinuing the marriage. Given this change in be- especially as evolution relates to sexuality. In liefs, the increased divorce rate may be driven the psychological/social approach, there are con- 474 PART VI. INTERPERSONAL APPROACHES cepts such as cognition (e.g., prototypes), social between breeding pairs of partners so that both motives, interaction and communication, and partners would attend to their helpless infants. various classifications of love. Lacking intensive caregiving from both adults, pairs without such bonds lost the evolutionary race through higher infant mortality. Such Naturalistic/Biological Approaches primitive emotional bonding was hypothesized Approaches to passionate and companionate to be the beginning of love. Related themes love, attachment processes, and the evolution of have been developed further by evolutionary love provide an overview of the naturalistic/bi- psychologists. For example, Buss (1988) defined ological classification. love as consisting of behaviors enacted by both females and males that strengthen the bonding function and ultimately serve to perpetuate the Passionate and Companionate Love human species. Building on Trivers’s (1972) dif- Berscheid and Walster (1978) defined passionate ferential parental investment model, in which love as a state of total absorption of two lovers, males seek to mate with many females, whereas with mood swings between ecstacy and anguish. females mate more selectively and nurture their Companionate love is the affection felt by two few offspring, evolutionary psychologists have people whose lives are deeply intertwined. hypothesized selected gender differences in Thus, love begins in the heat of passion but courtship and mating strategies. There is some eventually cools into the quiet glow of compan- supportive research for this evolutionary ap- ionship. This contrast of passion versus com- proach to interpersonal behaviors (e.g., Buss & panionship received its fullest development Kenrick, 1998; C. Hendrick & Hendrick, 1991), from Walster and Walster (1978). More re- although there also are vigorous counterargu- cently, Hatfield (1988) viewed the two types of ments (Eagly & Wood, 1999). love as coexisting in a relationship rather than as being sequential. Hatfield also noted that Psychological/Social Approaches people appear to want both passion and com- panionship in their love relationships. This Because of space constraints, we will discuss theme of including both passion and compan- only a sample of these approaches. They are di- ionship or friendship within the love bond was verse, ranging from a cognitive psychological to noted earlier and has been echoed by other a sociological perspective. scholars (e.g., Noller, 1996; Sprecher & Regan, 1998). Prototypes of Love Fehr (e.g., 1993, 1994) construed love as a pro- Attachment Approaches totype or “best example,” defined by its best or most representative set of features. Focusing on This approach was developed out of the work of love in general, Fehr discovered that respon- Bowlby (1969), who studied the types of rela- dents rated companionate love as most typical tionships (e.g., secure, anxious, avoidant) that of love, with maternal love, parental love, and infants form with their caregivers. These early friendship as the best examples. Passionate and attachments are posited to be causally related to sexual love received lower prototypicality rat- subsequent relationships. For example, Hazan ings. Regan, Kocan, and Whitlock (1998), in a and Shaver (1987) applied attachment theory to prototype study of romantic love in which par- adult love relationships, noting that it provides ticipants rated the central features of romantic an explanation for both the joys and the sor- love, found that passion was among the list of rows manifested in adult love. It should be central features, but it still ranked below several noted, however, that the evidence regarding this companionate features (e.g., honesty, trust). proposed relationship between childhood and Within this research paradigm, it appears that adult attachment styles is mixed, with questions the most general concept of love is that of com- of attachment “stability” awaiting further re- panionship. Romantic love is conceived as com- search (Feeney & Noller, 1996). panionate love plus passion. Evolution of Love Self-Expansion Mellen (1981) argued that the survival of the Aron and Aron (1986, 1996), based on Eastern human species necessitated an emotional bond traditions (e.g., Hinduism) concerning the con-  CHAPTER 34. LOVE 475 cept of self, proposed that humans have a basic later in the measurement section). Mania is motive for self-expansion. This growth of self “manic” love. A manic lover desperately wants may incorporate physical possessions, as well love but often finds that it is painful. Thus, as power and influence. Falling in love creates “stormy passion” is an apt descriptor, and a cy- a rapid expansion of self-boundaries and cle of jealousy, dramatic breakups, and equally therefore is pleasurable. When two people are dramatic reconciliations characterizes this love falling in love, they can mutually incorporate style. Agape is selfless and giving love where one another into the expansion process. In this the person is fully concerned with the partner’s way, “you and me” becomes “us.” welfare. Some degree of agapic altruism bolsters a love relationship; total agapic love is reserved typically for the heavenly, not the human, Love Triangles realm. In his Triangular Theory of Love, Sternberg These six love styles capture the multidimen- (1986) proposed that love is a mix of intimacy, sionality of love as experienced by people. We passion, and commitment. A given relationship have conducted research on these love styles may be high or low on each concept, with eight and will discuss such research in the following types of love being possible. For example, the sections. presence of all three components is named “consummate love,” the absence of all three is “nonlove,” and so on. Measurement of Love More recently, Sternberg has focused on love as a social construction, varying across time and Singer (1984a) made a basic distinction between cultures (e.g., Beall & Sternberg, 1995). Consis- appraisal and bestowal. People constantly ap- tent with this view, Sternberg (1998) has pro- praise objects and other people on both physical posed that love is also a very personal form of and psychological attributes. Appraisal of value social construction, a story that each individual is a human judgment process that lends itself creates by living it. readily to measurement. But is high appraisal of another person on a particular set of attributes the same as love? Singer is ambivalent on this Love Styles question, believing that love requires something In developing a typology of the different ways more—a bestowal. What is bestowal? According that people love each other, Lee (1973) used the to Singer, the bestowal of love, although ini- metaphor of a color wheel on which to place his tially based on appraisal, ultimately becomes in- many “colors” of love. As with color, there dependent of appraisal and constitutes an un- were primary love styles and secondary, and qualified, unencumbered emotional valuing of even tertiary, mixes. Considerable research on the other. Love is offered to the partner simply love styles has built on Lee’s theory (e.g., C. as a gift (not unlike aspects of Agape, discussed Hendrick & Hendrick, 1986). Attention has fo- earlier). cused on six relatively independent types An idea such as bestowal creates measure- (styles) of love. In brief, the six styles cover the ment problems. How do we measure something gamut. Eros is passionate love, where the lover that is as essential and yet as ethereal as be- idealizes the partner, has definite preferences for stowal? Yet we should not dismiss a concept just physical characteristics in a partner, and pursues because we do not currently know how to mea- love with intensity. A faint hint of Platonic eros sure it. Concepts such as bestowal seem impor- lingers in the definition of this style. Ludus is tant for the development of a positive psychol- love played as a game, for mutual enjoyment, ogy: without the intensity of Eros. Ludus is short on commitment, and the “game of love” can occur The concept of bestowal as a human process with multiple partners simultaneously. This that becomes independent of appraisal is in- love style is reminiscent of medieval courtly triguing because it provides a means for love. Storge is friendship love and is analogous new creation within the world. Bestowal as to companionate love, discussed previously. gift is an aptly chosen metaphor. Love as Pragma is practical love; it involves “shopping” bestowal creates what did not exist before, a for a mate with a list of desired qualities in hand new value. In this sense love can be uncon- (e.g., computer matching). In Pragma, a mate is ditional. It is its own value. This notion also selected on the basis of an “appraisal” (discussed suggests why people are so preoccupied with 476 PART VI. INTERPERSONAL APPROACHES love. On one view, love may be nothing but Hendrick, 1990) and a rigorously validated a bonding glue for creatures who evolved as short form with four items per subscale (see this group animals; but from the inside, from short form of the LAS in the appendix; C. Hen- the human viewpoint, love, as bestowal, is drick, Hendrick, & Dicke, 1998). the very act of creation that allows humans to be god-like. Only in bestowing love is something truly new created, and people re- Current Research on Love turn to that magic potion again and again. It sustains life—and the species. (S. Hen- The theories about love discussed in the preced- drick & Hendrick, 1992, p. 34) ing section have led to considerable empirical research in recent decades. In this section, we In the future, perhaps disparate concepts such explore current love research, including the top- as appraisal and bestowal can be joined within ics of how people communicate love, love styles, one theoretical framework through the use of love across cultures, love’s links with sexuality, nonlinear dynamics (e.g., Kaplan & Glass, and love’s relationship to happiness. 1995). Nonlinear dynamics involves the use of a set of mathematical approaches in which one Communicating Love searches for order in what may appear to be complex random events. For example, nonlinear Researchers in communications are particularly equations may show that a phenomenon in interested in how people communicate love to State A was in fact deterministically trans- one another. Marston, Hecht, and Robers formed into State B, even though raw obser- (1987), who examined how love was both ex- vation might suggest only random variation perienced and communicated in intimate rela- from A to B. In this sense, some future theory tionships, used qualitative analyses of interview of love might transform appraisal in an orderly information to derive categories of communi- way into the ostensibly very different state of cation “toward” a partner and “from” a partner. bestowal via nonlinear dynamics (see Eiser, People reported communicating love to a part- 1994; Guastello, 1997). ner and having love communicated to them For now, however, we have the various from a partner by saying “I love you,” being paper-and-pencil questionnaires that purport to understanding and supportive, touching, spend- measure one or more types of love. Some of the ing time together, communicating emotion, and more popular of these measures include Rubin’s giving eye contact (Marston et al., 1987). Ex- (1970) scales that assess loving and liking; Hat- tending this research, Hecht, Marston, and Lar- field and Sprecher’s (1986) Passionate Love key (1994) developed a typology of “love Scale; a variety of instruments to measure at- ways,” which included both verbal and nonver- tachment based on Hazan and Shaver’s (1987) bal methods of showing love to a partner. They seminal study; Fehr’s (1993) various prototype identified five different ways (or styles) of love measures of love; Davis and Todd’s (1985) Re- (active/collaborative, committed, intuitive, se- lationship Rating Form; and Sternberg’s (1986) cure, traditional), each of which used somewhat Triangular Theory of Love Scale. different methods of communicating. As we Our own measure of love, the Love Attitudes have discussed elsewhere, “Although this re- Scale (LAS), is based on Lee’s (1973) typological search was interesting in a number of ways, approach to love. We construed the six types of perhaps its most significant contribution was love as six variables and, based on work by the recognition of love as multifaceted and as Lasswell and Lasswell (1976), developed an in- subjective and to some degree, unique within itial set of six subscales (C. Hendrick & Hen- each person’s experience” (S. Hendrick & Hen- drick, 1986). The subscales of the LAS have drick, 2000b, p. 209). good psychometric properties (e.g., factor struc- Love and other aspects of relationships are ture and loadings, alphas, test-retest reliabili- communicated in complex ways, of course. For ties) and are relatively independent of each example, research on the “positive illusions” other. The LAS offers a promising approach to that love partners hold about each other and the quantitative measurement of a qualitative their relationship (Murray & Holmes, 1997; typology (see research reported in a later sec- Murray, Holmes, & Griffin, 1996) suggests that tion). Refinements of the LAS include a such illusions may actually influence relation- relationship-specific version (C. Hendrick & ship outcomes positively: “A willingness to  CHAPTER 34. LOVE 477 make a leap of faith—to see relationships in the Dion, 1996), others believe that most funda- best possible light—is a critical feature of sat- mental aspects of love transcend place and time. isfying, stable relationships” (Murray & Cho and Cross (1995) found that the themes of Holmes, 1997, p. 600). passionate love, obsessive love, casual love, de- In related research, Meeks, Hendrick, and voted love, and free choice of a mate were pres- Hendrick (1998), assessed both love variables ent in Chinese literature dating back thousands and communication variables for college student of years. Thus these phenomena are not new. dating couples. They found that both love vari- These authors used the Love Attitudes Scale (C. ables and communication variables, including Hendrick & Hendrick, 1986) to ascertain the the ability to handle conflict constructively, current love attitudes of Taiwanese students liv- were predictive of relationship satisfaction. ing in the United States (average time spent in Consistent with the research of Murray and her the United States was 31 months). Specifically, colleagues (1996, 1997), perceptions of some they examined whether the themes expressed in partner variables such as self-disclosure were ancient Chinese literature were still present and more predictive of participants’ relationship sat- whether they would map onto the six love isfaction than were partners’ actual levels of dis- styles or attitudes. The authors found many closure. similarities between the Taiwanese students and American participants, though the six love styles did not match perfectly across cultures. Love Styles For example, Agape (altruistic) and Pragma As noted earlier, the love styles approach also (practical) love combined and became “Obliga- captures the multidimensional aspects of love. tory love” for the Taiwanese. These six different love attitudes or styles have In other research, European American, Japa- been used to explore many aspects of love, in- nese American, and Pacific Islander residents of cluding gender differences, relationship satisfac- Hawaii were compared on several aspects of love tion, and love and friendship. and relationships (Doherty, Hatfield, Thomp- Gender differences in love styles have oc- son, & Choo, 1994). All the groups were similar curred in most research studies, with men typ- in both companionate and passionate love. ically appearing to report more game-playing Sprecher et al. (1994) found similar love atti- (ludic) love and women more friendship- tudes and experiences when they studied Amer- oriented (storgic), practical (pragmatic), and ican, Japanese, and Russian approaches to love. possessive (manic) love (C. Hendrick & Hen- Though there certainly were cultural differ- drick, 1986). These findings are relatively stable. ences—Japanese respondents identified less with But these gender differences may have little to certain romantic beliefs, and Russians were less do with whether or not love is experienced pos- likely to require love as a prerequisite for mar- itively. For example, men disagree less than riage—similarities abounded. Similarities be- women with ludic love. But they still disagree! tween ethnic groups also were identified by Game-playing love has been shown to be neg- Contreras et al. (1996), who studied Mexican atively related to relationship satisfaction (S. American and Anglo married couples. They Hendrick, Hendrick, & Adler, 1988). Women found only modest love and sex attitude differ- may be more friendship-oriented, practical, and ences among the groups. In addition, Hispanic- possessive than men, but these love styles are oriented, bicultural, and Anglo groups were not related strongly to satisfaction. On the similar in passionate, altruistic, and friendship- other hand, women and men differ little on pas- oriented love, as well as in their relationship sionate love, which is related strongly to satis- satisfaction. Commenting on the findings in this faction (S. Hendrick et al., 1988). In fact, pas- area, Hatfield and Rapson (1996) concluded that sion is very predictive of satisfaction across both “throughout the modern world, people turn out ages and cultures (Contreras, Hendrick, & Hen- to be surprisingly similar in the way they ex- drick, 1996). perience passionate love” (p. 88). We are indeed more the same than we are different. In addition to learning more about cultural Love Across Cultures similarities and differences in love and relation- Although some scholars note that the rich tex- ships, attention is finally being paid to phenom- ture and subtle nuances of love need to be un- ena that have important implications for per- derstood within a cultural context (Dion & sons’ well-being: love and sex. 478 PART VI. INTERPERSONAL APPROACHES case in most encounters between prostitutes Love and Sexuality and clients), for most of us, most of the time, Scholars of relationships typically have either love and sex are linked. separated the study of love from that of sexu- ality (with some people studying one topic, and Love and Happiness different people studying the other topic), or they have tried to subsume one by the other. Love clearly is important to the human condi- Aron and Aron (1991) visualized scholarship on tion, as is being in a relationship. Baumeister the topics as a continuum, with “sex is really and Leary (1995) have argued persuasively that love” at one end and “love is really sex” at the humans are a group species and thus have a other end. Some scholars view the two aspects “need to belong.” Consistent with this thesis, of human experience as linked, however, with Myers and Diener (1995), in discussing happi- both sex and love having important and related ness, noted, “Throughout the Western world, roles in intimate, partnered relationships. Regan married people of both sexes report more hap- (1998; Regan & Berscheid, 1999), for example, piness than those never married, divorced, or noted that sexual desire is a fundamental com- separated” (p. 15). Still other research results ponent of romantic love. In our work, we have confirm this finding. In a series of studies ex- found positive relationships between love (as ploring people’s perceptions of the links be- measured by the LAS; C. Hendrick & Hendrick, tween love and sex (S. Hendrick & Hendrick, 1986) and sex (as measured by the Sexual At- 2000a), we also examined the links between titudes Scale; S. Hendrick & Hendrick, 1987). happiness and several relationship variables. In For example, greater erotic (Eros) and altruistic one sample of 348 college students, people who (Agape) love are related to more idealistic sex- were in love were significantly happier than uality (the Communion subscale of the Sexual people not in love, as measured by a question Attitudes Scale), whereas game-playing love concerning happiness. In addition, people who (Ludus) is related positively to casual and bio- were in a relationship were happier than those logically oriented sexuality (Permissiveness and not in a relationship. In addition, for this same Instrumentality subscales). sample, happiness scores were correlated posi- More recently, we (S. Hendrick & Hendrick, tively with passionate love (r ⫽.33, p ⬍.001), 2000a) have assumed that people link love and friendship love (r ⫽.13, p ⬍.05), and relation- sex (broadly construed as more than just inter- ship satisfaction scores (r ⫽.35, p ⬍.001). course) in their relationships and have asked Findings were quite similar for another sample people to describe these links. Several themes of 274 college-age participants. Given the cor- emerged, including love being the most impor- relational nature of these data, it may be that tant thing in the relationship and coming before people who are satisfied with their romantic/ sex in both significance and sequencing. An- partnered relationships are happier, or people other significant theme is that sex is viewed as who are happier are more satisfied with their a profoundly important way of demonstrating relationships. Though the correlation between love. passionate love and happiness was more modest In a major large-scale study of sexual behav- (only.18 in our second study), it nevertheless ior in the United States, Laumann, Gagnon, indicated some link between happiness and love. Michael, and Michaels (1994) found that re- The findings discussed so far in this chapter spondents who expressed the greatest physical lead to a significant question. If we wish to fos- pleasure and emotional satisfaction in their re- ter positive conditions in the human commu- lationships were those in partnered, monoga- nity, and if love, satisfaction, and happiness are mous relationships. Although love is not dis- all related to one another to some degree, how cussed directly, it surely is implied. might we augment people’s experiencing of Researchers may have been slow to link sex these phenomena? with love, but based on our personal, observa- tional, and clinical experience, we know the two are related. While it is possible to experi- Interventions to Increase Love and ence love without sexual/physical immediacy Satisfaction (as in long-distance relationships where part- ners are separated for extended periods), or to We have discussed elsewhere some ways of experience sex without love (presumably the “teaching” love (C. Hendrick & Hendrick, 2000;  CHAPTER 34. LOVE 479 S. Hendrick & Hendrick, 2000b) and of con- is evident in the care of an elderly parent by a ducting couple therapy so as to repair or enrich middle-aged adult child. love (S. Hendrick, 1995; S. Hendrick & Hen- It is easy to offer examples of love and say drick, 1992). In the following section, we offer that we “teach” it by modeling, but if we were additional suggestions. to teach a course on love, we might do more. We would draw readings from religion, philos- ophy, literature, and other areas and discuss Teaching About Love as Well as them in depth. We would ask student partici- Teaching Love pants to spend time with a parent or other fam- Courses dealing with sexuality, close relation- ily member, specifically telling that person how ships, courtship and marriage, interpersonal much he or she is appreciated. At another time, skills, and so on are relatively popular offerings students would be asked to spend time with on college campuses in many countries. Such their best friend, simply engaging in a favored courses provide opportunities for students to activity. Another “assignment” would involve learn about themselves and their romantic, fam- spending time with a small child—walking in ily, and friendship relationships through under- the park, feeding ducks, reading stories. Still standing theories and concepts, as well as by more time would be spent quietly, in a place examining their own attitudes and values. For they considered “holy,” remembering all the example, students might be asked to fill out the people who had loved them. Admittedly, these Love Attitudes Scale for a current or previous tasks would be easier for some people than oth- romantic relationship and then to ask their best ers, for those who have been well loved as op- friend to fill out the scale. They might be asked posed to less loved. But all would surely profit to discuss their answers with their friend and to from a focus on the cup as half full (or one compare their similarities and differences. They quarter full or three quarters full) rather than then could use class time to discuss the expe- half empty, as well as a serious contemplation rience of learning about their own and their on acts of loving and being loved. And acts is friends’ love styles and talking together about an operative word. Teaching love means teach- them. Such an exercise would teach the students ing acts, as well as teaching words. Yet increas- not only about love but also about friendship, ing love does not necessarily imply adding self-disclosure, and how aspects of close rela- things to one’s life; it can also mean subtracting tionships fit with each other. Any other love things. measures or relationship measures could be em- ployed in a similar fashion. Removing Barriers to Love Although teaching “about” love is important and potentially useful, a much more pro- Although removing barriers to love could mean foundly difficult yet important undertaking is something like removing racial and religious in- “teaching love.” Where should we look for our tolerance, we are referring here to the strategies models of this? Some of our major social insti- a therapist might employ in helping long-term tutions, organized religions, for example, might partners achieve a more satisfying love relation- posit that they teach love in the context of ship. When couples seek relationship counsel- teaching religion. To the extent that such ing, the presenting problem or problems may groups profess tolerance, openness, a valuing of be related to a range of stressors, including diversity, and extension of oneself in service of money, sex, children, in-laws, gender role con- another, they do indeed teach love. Voluntary flicts, and the like. A therapist’s tendency may organizations such as the Red Cross or the Sal- be to “prescribe” activities such as time set aside vation Army teach love in large measure by every evening for talking and sharing the showing love. Love also can be ably “taught” events of the day, or a “date” every weekend, by recovery organizations, most notably Alco- for which the children, cares, and problems os- holics Anonymous. tensibly are left at home. But such a message Ideally, we teach love in our families, by en- may simply suggest to couples that they have joying each other, protecting each other, and of- to add something else to their already too busy fering social support to each other. Selfless giv- schedules. ing (i.e., bestowal) is nowhere more evident What therapists may need to do is advise than in parents caring for a new baby. Or, at their clients to dispense with some of what they the other end of the life span continuum, love are already doing before they add something 480 PART VI. INTERPERSONAL APPROACHES new, even something positive. They might se- require touching. Premature infants who are lectively dispense with having a clean house, touched gain weight more rapidly (Field, 1998). nice meals, and ironed clothes and settle for a People with pets (whom they presumably house cleaned once a month, meals that are touch) show health benefits (Vormbrock & sometimes just soup and sandwiches, and Grossberg, 1988). Massage therapists are being clothes worn straight from the dryer. Some of frequented by more and more people. All these kids’ lessons and activities, for families affluent manifestations of the need to touch and be enough to afford them, might be dropped also, touched speak to the importance of physical leaving more time for family activities and for contact, enacted in romantic love relationships unstructured time in which kids can be kids. Al- by sexual touching and sexual interaction (in- though it can be anxiety-provoking to “sim- cluding but not limited to intercourse) as well plify,” it can also be anxiety-relieving. The gift as more affectional touching. of time is one of the most loving gifts there is. In addition to linking love with sex and con- If therapists tried to help couples make more struing sexuality more broadly, in future re- “space” in their lives before prescribing any search we should more fully engage the issue tasks to address other issues, much, or in some of sexuality in aging. The aging of the United cases all, of the presenting problem would take States population, the lengthening life span, and care of itself. Sometimes less is more, and some- the Viagra phenomenon have not so much times less busy-ness means more love. changed sexuality in later life as made it more visible. Both academic writing (Levy, 1994) and a series of popular articles in American Asso- Future Directions ciation of Retired Persons’ Modern Maturity make clear that later-life sexuality is physically The study of love needs to become a priority and emotionally satisfying, limited less by age for researchers and funding agencies in the near than by the availability of a suitable partner. future. One need only look around to under- And for the aged, as for the young, “Sexual in- stand that love already is a priority for much of tercourse isn’t everything. Just being together humanity. Scientists have begun once again to is an essential part of intimacy” (Mathias- view humans as whole persons, not as discon- Riegel, 1999, p. 48). Yet “society stubbornly nected minds and bodies. Along with this new- hangs on to stereotypes about older sex” found regard for the interplay of mind and (Mathias-Riegel, 1999, p. 47), so research that body—nowhere more evident than in the enriches our knowledge about love, sex, and ag- current volume—must come an awareness that ing should be popularized and disseminated people’s intimate relationships, most particu- widely. Love and sex span all of life (Latham, larly their love relationships, are an essential 1997; Pickett, 1995). aspect of this interplay. Love and sex at any age are affected nega- One aspect of this recognition of the inter- tively by stress, one of positive psychology’s weaving of mind and body is an appreciation for worst enemies. “ ‘Less stress’ and ‘more free the (often) shared context of love and sexuality. time’ are the top things 45–59-year-olds say As noted previously, rather than trying to sub- would most improve their sex life” (Jacoby, sume sex within love or love within sex, we 1999, p. 43). And Herbert Benson (1996) noted prefer to view the two as coequals in partnered that “the vast majority of the medical com- intimate relationships. And sex needs to be very plaints brought to doctors’ offices are stress- broadly defined in future research to include all and belief-related” (p. 292). The “less is more” forms of physical affection rather than only philosophy we espoused earlier has stress re- sexual intercourse. duction as its proximal purpose. If we can help In our own research linking love and sex, we people to simplify their lives, thus reducing try to make it explicit to respondents that “sex” their stress levels, it is very likely that peoples’ can mean many types of physical involvement. relationships (including love and sex) would be Kissing, caressing, and other such affectionate enriched greatly. Moreover, the positive aspects touching can potentially be more important of their lives would be enriched accordingly. than intercourse. Humans may be hardwired In our introduction, we noted that love, sex, for intercourse, but they are even more funda- friendship, and marriage are increasingly linked mentally hardwired for physical touch. Babies in romantic relationships. We also have argued  CHAPTER 34. LOVE 481 for the integrated study of love and sexuality 4. My partner fits my ideal standards of throughout the life span. We wish to close by physical beauty/handsomeness. generalizing our argument: Love should be studied as a central concept with links to many Ludus 5. I believe that what my partner other positive psychological concepts. In this doesn’t know about me won’t hurt way, a systematic approach to a positive psy- him/her. chology can be developed. 6. I have sometimes had to keep my Perhaps an example will make our vision partner from finding out about other more specific. Aron and Aron (1996) noted that partners. their self-expansion approach to love could 7. My partner would get upset if he/ serve as a metatheory, linking broad sets of em- she knew of some of the things I’ve pirical findings. If self-expansion is intrinsically done with other people. desirable, and love promotes self-expansion, 8. I enjoy playing the “game of love” then being in love should be related to many with my partner and a number of other positive attributes. Being in love should other partners. result in higher self-esteem and stronger self- affirmation, as well as more other-affirmation. Storge 9. Our love is the best kind because it Positive emotional states such as happiness and grew out of a long friendship. an optimistic outlook should correlate positively 10. Our friendship merged gradually with love. Hope for the future should be abun- into love over time. dant. Along with such hope should go a height- 11. Our love is really a deep friend- ened sense of self-efficacy and the ability to ship, not a mysterious, mystical cope with one’s world. emotion. If Singer (1984a) is correct that love becomes 12. Our love relationship is the most bestowal and thereby creates new value in the satisfying because it developed world, then love should create new meaning in from a good friendship. the world, meaning that is rich in surplus at- tributes. One such attribute might be an en- Pragma 13. A main consideration in choosing hanced empathy and altruism, not only for the my partner was how he/she loved one but perhaps toward the world at large. would reflect on my family. Along with the heightened sense of self- 14. An important factor in choosing efficacy, an enlightened altruism, perhaps com- my partner was whether or not bined with an enlivened sense of creativity, he/she would be a good parent. could fuel the generation of great works. Thus, 15. One consideration in choosing we view love as a central concept within a my partner was how he/she linked, dynamic structure of other positive con- would reflect on my career. cepts. The concepts are fundamentally related, 16. Before getting very involved with their relational nature mirroring the relational my partner, I tried to figure out nature of the human community. With this how compatible his/her hered- view, a much broader, more fully integrated un- itary background would be with derstanding of the human condition is possible, mine in case we ever had chil- one that will allow a complete positive psychol- dren. ogy to emerge. Mania 17. When my partner doesn’t pay at- tention to me, I feel sick all over. APPENDIX Love Attitudes Scale— 18. Since I’ve been in love with my Short Form partner, I’ve had trouble concen- trating on anything else. Eros 1. My partner and I have the right phys- 19. I cannot relax if I suspect that my ical “chemistry” between us. partner is with someone else. 2. I feel that my partner and I were 20. If my partner ignores me for a meant for each other. while, I sometimes do stupid 3. My partner and I really understand things to try to get his/her atten- each other. tion back. 482 PART VI. INTERPERSONAL APPROACHES Agape 21. I would rather suffer myself than Buss, D. M., & Kenrick, D. T. (1998). Evolutionary let my partner suffer. social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, 22. I cannot be happy unless I place & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social my partner’s happiness before my psychology (Vol. 2, 4th ed., pp. 982–1026). Bos- own. ton: McGraw-Hill. 23. I am usually willing to sacrifice my Cho, W., & Cross, S. E. (1995). Taiwanese love own wishes to let my partner styles and their association with self-esteem and achieve his/hers. relationship quality. Genetic, Social, and Gen- eral Psychology Monographs, 121, 283–309. 24. I would endure all things for the Contreras, R., Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. sake of my partner. (1996). Perspectives on marital love and satis- faction in Mexican American and Anglo couples. Note: Each item is rated on a five-point basis, Journal of Counseling and Development, 74, ranging from strongly agree to strongly dis- 408–415. agree with the statement. Adapted from C. Davis, K. E., & Todd, M. J. (1985). Assessing Hendrick, S. S. Hendrick, & A. Dicke. 1998. friendship: Prototypes, paradigm cases and re- “The Love Attitudes Scale: Short Form.”Journal lationship description. In S. Duck & D. Perlman of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 147– (Eds.), Understanding personal relationships: 159. Adapted with permission of the authors. An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 17–38). Lon- don: Sage. Dion, K. K., & Dion, K. L. (1996). Cultural per- References spectives on romantic love. Personal Relation- ships, 3, 5–17. Aron, A., & Aron, E. N. (1986). Love and the ex- Doherty, R. W., Hatfield, E., Thompson, K., & pansion of self: Understanding attraction and Choo, P. (1994). Cultural and ethnic influences satisfaction. New York: Hemisphere. on love and attachment. Personal Relationships, Aron, A., & Aron, E. N. (1991). Love and sexual- 1, 391–398. ity. In K. McKinney & S. Sprecher (Eds.), Sex- Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of uality in close relationships (pp. 25–48). Hills- sex differences in human behavior. American dale, NJ: Erlbaum. Psychologist, 54, 408–423. Aron, E. N., & Aron, A. (1996). Love and expan- Eiser, J. R. (1994). Attitudes, chaos and the con- sion of the self: The state of the model. Personal nectionist mind. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Relationships, 3, 45–58. Feeney, J., & Noller, P. (1996). Adult attachment. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments Fehr, B. (1993). How do I love thee? Let me con- as a fundamental human motivation. Psycholog- sult my prototype. In S. Duck (Ed.), Individuals ical Bulletin, 117, 497–529. in relationships (pp. 87–120). Newbury Park, Beall, A. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (1995). The social CA: Sage. construction of love. Journal of Social and Per- Fehr, B. (1994). Prototype-based assessment of sonal Relationships, 12, 417–438. laypeople’s views of love. Personal Relation- Benson, H. (1996). Timeless healing: The power ships, 1, 309–331. and biology of belief. New York: Scribner’s. Field, T. M. (1998). Touch therapies. In R. R. Berscheid, E. (2000). Foreword: Back to the future Hoffman, M. F. Sherrick, & J. S. Warm (Eds.), and forward to the past. In C. Hendrick & S. S. Viewing psychology as a whole (pp. 603–624). Hendrick (Eds.), Close relationships: A source- Washington, DC: American Psychological As- book (pp. ix–xxi). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. sociation. Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1969). Interpersonal Gadlin, H. (1977). Private lives and public order: attraction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. A critical view of the history of intimate re- Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1978). Interpersonal lations in the United States. In G. Levinger attraction (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison- & H. L. Raush (Eds.), Close relationships: Wesley. Perspectives on the meaning of intimacy Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. At- (pp. 33–72). Amherst: University of Massachu- tachment. New York: Basic Books. setts Press. Buss, D. M. (1988). Love acts: The evolutionary Guastello, S. J. (1997). Science evolves: An intro- biology of love. In R. J. Sternberg & M. L. duction to nonlinear dynamics, psychology, and Barnes (Eds.), The psychology of love (pp. 100– life sciences. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, 117). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. and Life Sciences, 1, 1–6.